Von der Tann vs. Inflexible

Historical what if discussions, hypothetical operations, battleship vs. battleship engagements, design your own warship, etc.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7490
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Von der Tann vs. Inflexible

Postby RF » Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:06 am

Here is another battlecruiser contest, with one that did blow up. Would VdT be able to blow up Inflexible?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
Gary
Senior Member
Posts: 706
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 3:37 pm
Location: Northumberland

Postby Gary » Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:09 pm

Hi RF.

I'd have to vote for Von Der Tann.
Whilst she has the smaller main battery, She is better armoured.
Inflexible had what? about 6 inches of belt armour?

That is probably more of a liability against a ship like Von Der Tann.
God created the world in 6 days.........and on the 7th day he built the Scharnhorst

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7490
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Postby RF » Fri Nov 10, 2006 9:24 am

Gary wrote:Hi RF.

I'd have to vote for Von Der Tann.
Whilst she has the smaller main battery, She is better armoured.
Inflexible had what? about 6 inches of belt armour?

That is probably more of a liability against a ship like Von Der Tann.


Von der Tann did an extended Atlantic cruise (3 months?) in the summer of 1912 and there was talk of sending her to Tsingtao.

The Battle of the Falklands 1914 - Von der Tann, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau vs. Invincible and Inflexible: would von Spee have won?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

Captain Morgan
Member
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 4:27 am
Location: The Great Lakes, USA

Re: Von der Tann vs. Inflexible

Postby Captain Morgan » Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:23 am

RF wrote:Here is another battlecruiser contest, with one that did blow up. Would VdT be able to blow up Inflexible?

Let's see, Von der Tann is credited with sinking HMS Indefatigable at Jutland. This was a larger faster version of Invicible. I think that answers the question before it's asked.
There are 2 types of vessels out there. One type is called a target. If it isn't capable of silently doing 30+ knots at 2000 ft depth its always considered a target. The vessel that can silently go fast and deep is the one the targets are afraid of.

User avatar
VoidSamukai
Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 11:42 pm

Re: Von der Tann vs. Inflexible

Postby VoidSamukai » Sat Feb 27, 2016 5:34 am

I'd take Von Der Tann. Better armour and more than adaquet firepower to punch through Inflexible. If 2 Von Der Tanns were in the place of the S&G in Falkland, the Brits would be really screwed XD

User avatar
frontkampfer
Member
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 2:35 am
Location: Phillipsburg, NJ - USA

Re: Von der Tann vs. Inflexible

Postby frontkampfer » Sat Feb 27, 2016 2:26 pm

Have to agree. VdT was a tough, fast BC & the fact that she took out Indefatigable, then took a beating & stayed in line gives testament to her design. The KLM should have had at least two more of them in my opinion. A very good ship!
"I will not have my ship shot out from under my ass!"

User avatar
VoidSamukai
Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 11:42 pm

Re: Von der Tann vs. Inflexible

Postby VoidSamukai » Sat Feb 27, 2016 8:47 pm

frontkampfer wrote:Have to agree. VdT was a tough, fast BC & the fact that she took out Indefatigable, then took a beating & stayed in line gives testament to her design. The KLM should have had at least two more of them in my opinion. A very good ship!


Nah. Instead of two more Von Der Tanns, they decided to build Molktes instead. Why build more old when you can build more new?


Return to “Hypothetical Naval Scenarios”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest