KGV sorties with POW

Historical what if discussions, hypothetical operations, battleship vs. battleship engagements, design your own warship, etc.
User avatar
tameraire01
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun May 11, 2014 11:56 pm

KGV sorties with POW

Post by tameraire01 » Mon May 12, 2014 12:08 am

Would the battle of Denmark straight be different if KGV sorties with POW instead of Hood?
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas. Joseph Stalin

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 4151
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by alecsandros » Mon May 12, 2014 7:58 am

tameraire01 wrote:Would the battle of Denmark straight be different if KGV sorties with POW instead of Hood?
Yes, the chances of Bismarck getting sunk increase substantially. On the other hand, in the hystorical encounter, Bismarck had good chances of getting sunk...

Guest

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by Guest » Mon May 12, 2014 11:00 am

British closing approach tactics would likely have differed, since Hood's meager deck protection would not have been an issue.

User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 2972
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by Dave Saxton » Mon May 12, 2014 1:44 pm

The closing approach tactics were British fighting doctrine of the time, regardless of the ships involved.
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.

Guest

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by Guest » Tue May 13, 2014 2:08 am

Dave Saxton wrote:The closing approach tactics were British fighting doctrine of the time, regardless of the ships involved.
..... Understood a priori, Dave. The point I was seeking to make was that such an aggressive angle of closure as that taken by Holland, which wooded the after turrets of both ships, might not have been considered necessary.

Byron

tameaire01

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by tameaire01 » Tue May 13, 2014 4:02 pm

Would both of them be able to sink bismark in the straits of denmark? Or would it be a turkey shoot?

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7526
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by RF » Wed May 14, 2014 8:25 am

tameraire01 wrote:Would the battle of Denmark straight be different if KGV sorties with POW instead of Hood?
By definition it would have been totally different.

In hindsight it might have been the preferred line up, apart from the fact that the Iceland-Faroes passage would then have had to be covered by Hood/Repulse....
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7526
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by RF » Wed May 14, 2014 8:35 am

Guest wrote:
Dave Saxton wrote:The closing approach tactics were British fighting doctrine of the time, regardless of the ships involved.
..... Understood a priori, Dave. The point I was seeking to make was that such an aggressive angle of closure as that taken by Holland, which wooded the after turrets of both ships, might not have been considered necessary.
Byron
But there is another consideration here, being the obvious reluctance of the Germans to engage RN capital ships. Given 2 to 1 superiority in numbers and the risk of the Germans attempting to disengage quickly or as soon as they could the scenario would suggest a rapid approach to close the range quickly to make it more difficult for the Germans to disengage by abrupt course alteration.
If I were the RN commander I would have used the same approach as Holland: whilst here eight guns would be masked twelve guns would be in action (leaving aside gun break down issues) straight away. I would expect a very long action, so the initial run in won't be that significant to the battle as a whole, except to get into a better position to hold the Germans in range.

Another aspect to this not mentioned so far is that the Prinz Eugen would be far less useful to the Germans and at greater long term risk of being damaged and sunk. To that end I would again favour the approach used by Holland in order to bring Prinz Eugen under fire from sixteen 5.25 inch guns as soon as possible. I would want to give that ship as little a chance of escaping as possible.
Last edited by RF on Wed May 14, 2014 8:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7526
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by RF » Wed May 14, 2014 8:44 am

tameaire01 wrote:Would both of them be able to sink bismark in the straits of denmark? Or would it be a turkey shoot?
Of the 4 ships involved in this scenario the only likely vessel to be sunk would be Prinz Eugen. The three battleships are all heavily armoured and not easily sinkable by gunfire alone.

I can't see it being a turkey shoot - apart from the cruiser who do you think the turkeys are?

More likely to be a very long slugging match.... it could last for hours, with no winners.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

Iranon
Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:23 am

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by Iranon » Wed May 14, 2014 8:47 am

Sinking a modern battleship isn't a trivial task even if you manage to knock it out of combat. It would probably require torpedos, which most battleships didn't carry because the hazards outweighed the benefit.
2 KGVs would be a very tall order for Bismarck, one alone was a credible opponent. Larger size doesn't always buy you better combat ability. Redesign the KGVs to have Bismarck's speed and especially endurance on the same armament/protection, and the weight difference goes away. The historical scenario already favoured the RN.

As for combat distance: The higher-velocity guns and spaced array armour scheme preferred by the Germans offered some advantages at the short ranges the British sought. While the British weren't fully aware of this, their doctrine is sound even if it's not playing to the strengths of their ships.
A British capital ship having to be towed to the breakers for a German battleship limping home with a good chance of not making it was acceptable. Better than allowing a German heavy raider to escape with only light damage.

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 4151
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by alecsandros » Wed May 14, 2014 9:31 am

Iranon wrote:2 KGVs would be a very tall order for Bismarck, one alone was a credible opponent.


Only in theory...

Byron Angel
Senior Member
Posts: 778
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:06 am

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by Byron Angel » Wed May 14, 2014 12:18 pm

But there is another consideration here, being the obvious reluctance of the Germans to engage RN capital ships. Given 2 to 1 superiority in numbers and the risk of the Germans attempting to disengage quickly or as soon as they could the scenario would suggest a rapid approach to close the range quickly to make it more difficult for the Germans to disengage by abrupt course alteration.
If I were the RN commander I would have used the same approach as Holland: whilst here eight guns would be masked twelve guns would be in action (leaving aside gun break down issues) straight away. I would expect a very long action, so the initial run in won't be that significant to the battle as a whole, except to get into a better position to hold the Germans in range.

Another aspect to this not mentioned so far is that the Prinz Eugen would be far less useful to the Germans and at greater long term risk of being damaged and sunk. To that end I would again favour the approach used by Holland in order to bring Prinz Eugen under fire from sixteen 5.25 inch guns as soon as possible. I would want to give that ship as little a chance of escaping as possible.
..... Fair comment, RF.

B

User avatar
tameraire01
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun May 11, 2014 11:56 pm

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by tameraire01 » Thu May 15, 2014 2:49 pm

By turkey shoot i mean would it come down to luck?
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas. Joseph Stalin

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7526
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by RF » Sun May 18, 2014 4:51 pm

I'm not quite sure what is mean't here. Turkey shoot as I understand it (bearing in mind I am British and the phrase is American in origin) is a one sided action in which the victim is slaughtered piecemeal virtually without loss to the victor. An example is the great 'Mariana's turkey shoot'' in the Pacific theatre where some 300 Jap carrier planes were systematically destroyed for almost no loss in return by the US.

I can't see the DS battle being a turkey shoot for either side. Even in the actual battle, while Hood blew up the Bismarck suffered damage which aborted the Rheinubung mission.

The only turkey shoot I can think of between the RN and German navies would be the second battle of Narvik.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 4151
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Re: KGV sorties with POW

Post by alecsandros » Mon May 19, 2014 1:28 pm

Thinking about the proposed scenario,

if KGV and PoW would have attacked together, I would expect KGV to lead with PoW closely behind her. Bismarck and Prinz Eugen would open fire on the lead ship, with 8 x 380mm and 8 x 203mm guns, while the British would thunder 12 x 356mm guns.

With Luetjens holding fire until 5:55, Bismarck may be hit several times before it would score a hit herself. At the given ranges, of 20km or less, any 356mm impact may be a debilitating one, with the entire above-water volume of the Bismarck being prone to heavy damage (or outright destruction) through impact shock, penetration or perforation.

Prinz Eugen would probably fire un-answered, and hit KGV several times, possibly disabling some secondary systems and damaging radars. Critical superstructure damage may have been delivered by 203mm guns, as the KGV carried light armor in her con towers, with only the main turrets and barbettes being heavily protected.

With Bismarck returning fire from 5:55, she would be in a good geometrical position, but in a bad tactical position. If by that time she would still have all main turrets operational, early heavy hits on KGV would appear. There was no section of KGV above the water (exept the 2.5 meters high main belt) capable of withstanding 380mm impacts at that range. KGV would suffer hits from Prinz Eugen and Bismarck, which would probably open rapid-fire after 2-3 minutes.

KGV would receive heavy hits quickly and would lose her artillery control systems fast. Bismarck would probably suffer superstructure damage and lose some systems.

Post Reply