Lutzow vs. US heavy cruiser

[Karl Heidenreich]

I agree with your assesment Bgile. But the problem that, instead of crushing the other two cruisers, he turn around and went to Montevideo. There was still fight to do before disengaging.

[RF]

That´s not the point. The point is about Langsdorf´s failure to achieve victory when he had the chance (and indeed he had it at hand). Of course he lost the battle when he was winning: Exeter was his challenge, once out of the combat GS could handle the other two cruisers with her superior armament, even if he decides to disengage.

This is all correct. But it is a bit difficult to make decisions and win the battle if you are unconscious.

[RF]

He didn't have the chance to sink Exeter. It would have taken quite some time to do, and he'd have been absolutely wrecked by close range cruiser fire and torpedoes while he ignored them. He disabled Exeter and then had to turn to the other opponents in self preservation.

I'm not sure this is right. Exeter had only one gun left firing and had fired its torpedoes. Ajax and Achilles were charging in at almost the limit of their range, and if Spee had altered course away from the two light cruisers she could have sunk Exeter whilst presenting only a short profile to Harwood. Spee could then have turned her attention to the light cruisers and sink them as well.

I think Karl is right, but that XO Kay should have assumed command and done this as Langsdorf was clearly impaired.

[yellowtail3]

Oh, I think Lutzow would have been inferior to a Baltimore, esp. as a US cruiser was outfitted mid-war. Heck - she would have been in trouble against light cruiser shooting 6"/47cal with heavy shells.

[lwd]

I'd give a Balitmore the odds in this one. Firing 9 guns with the potential for a higher rate of fire she's got a good chance of hitting first and more often and is firing heavy enough shells to hurt Lutzow. The latter has a chance but is fighting the odds. Even against an older US CA I'm not sure I would favor the German ship. As has been mentioned I'd bet on a Brooklyn or Clevland as well over one of the panzershiffe. They were almost without a doubt the best heavy cruisers of their day but their day had passed by WWII.

[Gary]

Yes, the key here is that you have 9 guns with a faster rate of fire against 6 with a slower rate of fire albeit they are heavier.
Remember, if the US CA knocks out 1 of the pocket battleships turrets then she has lost 50% of her firepower.
I foresee an American victory here unless the Germans can get lucky and land an 11inch thunderbolt into a vital part of the ship.

The Americans really showed the world how to build a proper CA, the Baltimores and later Des Moines were formidable ships indeed

[Bgile]

Unfortunately the US CAs built during WWII really had no one to fight. They served mainly as shore bombardment and AAA ships. A number of them did have long careers post WWII, though.

[Byron Angel]

The Americans really showed the world how to build a proper CA, the Baltimores and later Des Moines were formidable ships indeed

..... USS SALEM (Des Moines Class CA) memorial ship is berthed in Boston MA USA and is open to the public.


Happy New Year to one and all,

Byron

[dunmunro]

The big advantage that Lutzow has is in long range accuracy. The 11" guns had a much flatter trajectory and a much shorter ToF and so were more accurate, especially at long range, which means that the USN CA would have to endure a very dangerous run to get within effective range, which would be about 20k yards.

[Bgile]

The big advantage that Lutzow has is in long range accuracy. The 11" guns had a much flatter trajectory and a much shorter ToF and so were more accurate, especially at long range, which means that the USN CA would have to endure a very dangerous run to get within effective range, which would be about 20k yards.

Does this mean you think Prinz Eugen was outside of her effective range when she opened fire on Hood? I don't think 25,000 yds is outside effective range for an 8" gun, and I'm sure that they would not hesitate to open fire at that range or longer. I don't dispute the better ballistics of the 11" though.

[lwd]

The US 8" guns can reach out to 30,000 yards. Long range accuracy is a matter of fire control as well as the guns. With 9 to 6 guns and RDF I'll take the Baltimore even at long range.

[dunmunro]

The big advantage that Lutzow has is in long range accuracy. The 11" guns had a much flatter trajectory and a much shorter ToF and so were more accurate, especially at long range, which means that the USN CA would have to endure a very dangerous run to get within effective range, which would be about 20k yards.

Does this mean you think Prinz Eugen was outside of her effective range when she opened fire on Hood? I don't think 25,000 yds is outside effective range for an 8" gun, and I'm sure that they would not hesitate to open fire at that range or longer. I don't dispute the better ballistics of the 11" though.

In fact PE's 20.3cm guns had a max range of 36600 yds, at only 37 degs elevation and out range both the USN and RN 8" guns by a very wide margin, and PE actually opened fire on Hood, when the range was under 24k yds. Yes, 8"guns could hit at longer ranges than 2/3 max range but the odds of scoring a hit fall to very low levels, as we've seen from the previous discussions of long range 8" gun actions.

[Bgile]

We have nine guns vs six here. Do you seriously believe six guns have a greater possibility to hit than nine, even with a ballistics advantage? That's a 50% difference in hit probability. It just doesn't make sense. I have to wonder where you would draw the line. Three guns? Any other time you would be trying to minimize the probability of long range hits by anyone, wouldn't you? Suppose it was a British cruiser? Would that make a difference?

[dunmunro]

We have nine guns vs six here. Do you seriously believe six guns have a greater possibility to hit than nine, even with a ballistics advantage? That's a 50% difference in hit probability. It just doesn't make sense. I have to wonder where you would draw the line. Three guns? Any other time you would be trying to minimize the probability of long range hits by anyone, wouldn't you? Suppose it was a British cruiser? Would that make a difference?

Basically the 11" gun will be at least as accurate at 25k yds as the 8in at 20k, and will tend to maintain at least a 5k yd advantage, in terms of accuracy at longer ranges. The RN and USN 8" have almost identical ballistics. Harwood's great fear was that Langsdorf would immediately retreat and force the RN cruisers to endure a long run in before they could begin to hit GS and luckily Langsdorf chose to give away his long range advantage and close in rapidly. At 25k yds the 8in gun hit probability falls to a very low value, yet the 11in at 25k yds is still equivalent to the 8in at 20k yds. I would say that the 11in is probably more than twice as accurate as the 8in at 25k yds. Additionally, the PB skipper can opt to keep his A arcs open and use all 6 guns, while the CA skipper will have to close his A arcs to minimize the time at long ranges, thus reducing his firepower by a 1/3.

For example here we can see that a BB has about twice the accuracy at 20k yds as at 25k yds:

http://www.navweaps.com/index_inro/no31991-pic6.jpg
from:
http://www.navweaps.com/index_inro/INRO ... ery_p2.htm

the 11 shells are also much more destructive than a 8" having a much larger burster ranging from 14.5lbs for the AP to 35lb for the base fuzed HE, while the USN 335lb a8" AP was only 5 lb, so a single 11" hit is probably equivalent to 3 to 5 8" hits in terms of destructive potential. Fighting a PB would be a very tough proposition for any any Allied CA unless it could get close enough to overwhelm the PB quickly with many 8" hits.

[Bgile]

Your calculation of relative hitting power falls apart if the 8" shell hits a turret or other important area. If it does, the turret will be knocked out the same as a turret on the cruiser. What you seem to be saying is the AGS was a superior ship and all the worlds navies were stupid because they should have stopped building 8" cruisers and instead build 11" cruisers with six guns. I simply don't believe that and I don't believe AGS is going to be as effective as you think at long range. For example, she got very few hits on either British cruiser in their engagement in spite of a long battle and expending a lot of her ammunition. The historical results simply don't support your theory.