Naval History Forums

During the 1st World War, both commanded their countries battlecrusier squadrons. Both had distinguished careers which lead to each eventually heading up each navy respectively. You can take into account the size of their respective forces and the quality of ships & sailors in them. If you were either a British or German sailor who would you serve under and why?

I would personally choose Scheer. Beatty was a good admiral but his leadership style in battle was to "gung-ho." Beatty often rushed or made unusual decisions, and filled his ranks with personal he liked but may have not otherwise qualified for their posts. His communication practices were adequate at best to downright horrible in some instances. Beatty's battlecrusier fleet was well known in the RN to have less than par gunnery skills, though this was partially caused by their base location during the war.

Scheer for the most part was a cool commander in combat. He proved himself an excellent leader at Jutland, and knew when to cut his losses in the Battle for Dogger Bank. His ships had excellent track record in battle, and his sailor’s gunnery skills were excellent. All his ships and sailors fought well in dire situations, with the SMS Blucher fighting to the last second at Dogger Bank, and his battlecruisers keeping in line and fighting with the High Seas Fleet after taking a horrible beating from the 1st, 2nd BCS & 5th BS during Jutland.

I believe Scheer did not command at Dogger Bank. The High Seas Fleet commander was Friedrich von Ingenohl at the time, with Franz von Hipper in command of the battle cruisers. It was Hipper who actually fought the action against the British.

Scheer got the T crossed but he was a pretty agressive. Jellicoe was a gunnery expert and a much better comander than admitted. Beatty: too many casualties under him. But Hipper, he is the man.

To be honest, if I have to choose where to serve in a war I will better be an infantry man. When a ship goes... it goes all the way! But I think I can do with Hipper.

Kyler wrote:During the 1st World War, both commanded their countries battlecrusier squadrons. Both had distinguished careers which lead to each eventually heading up each navy respectively. You can take into account the size of their respective forces and the quality of ships & sailors in them. If you were either a British or German sailor who would you serve under and why?

I would personally choose Scheer. Beatty was a good admiral but his leadership style in battle was to "gung-ho." Beatty often rushed or made unusual decisions, and filled his ranks with personal he liked but may have not otherwise qualified for their posts. His communication practices were adequate at best to downright horrible in some instances. Beatty's battlecrusier fleet was well known in the RN to have less than par gunnery skills, though this was partially caused by their base location during the war.

Scheer for the most part was a cool commander in combat. He proved himself an excellent leader at Jutland, and knew when to cut his losses in the Battle for Dogger Bank. His ships had excellent track record in battle, and his sailor’s gunnery skills were excellent. All his ships and sailors fought well in dire situations, with the SMS Blucher fighting to the last second at Dogger Bank, and his battlecruisers keeping in line and fighting with the High Seas Fleet after taking a horrible beating from the 1st, 2nd BCS & 5th BS during Jutland.

Admittedly I made a huge brain fart, and meant to say Adm. Franz Von Hipper & Beatty. I don't know where my brain was at, so sorry for the confusion.

Jellicoe was a better commander then Scheer, but both made crucial mistakes at Jutland. Jellicoe command structure was so tight knit that no one took their own initiative especially during the night action.

Hipper was the best over commander at Jutland, and his command at Dogger Bank was good also. Only Beatty's poor decision led to Scheers escape at Dogger, but Beatty gung-ho attitude and poor communications ruined his chances at Dogger and Jutland.

Scheer and Beatty, not much to choose here. Now Hipper is a more interesting case - certainly a more aggressive commander. But if he were British I am inclined to think he would have been more defensive, no need for an all out battle when blockade can win the war for you.

What an interesting question! Although in reality none of us would have had a choice becasue of our nationality we can choose the sides in games and re-enactments (role-playing). Personally I would always select the German side as they were numerically at a disadvantage. However, to answer the question in the appropriate context I would prefer the German admiral. Best regards.

Pre-Dreadnought :

You are choosing quality over quantity. Fair enough.

If it is a question of serving under one or the other in a naval battle, it is Hipper without a moment's hesitation.

For all his personal charisma and physical courage, Beatty was a poor tactician on his best day. The battlecruiser force was IIRC his very first multi-ship command and it showed.

B

Hipper was the best over commander at Jutland, and his command at Dogger Bank was good also. Only Beatty's poor decision led to Scheers escape at Dogger, but Beatty gung-ho attitude and poor communications ruined his chances at Dogger and Jutland.

At Dogger, Scheer was not going to escape, he wasn´t present yet. I suppose you mean Hipper here.
Be not that sure about the outcome. It was probably as fortunate for Hipper as it was for Beatty to break the action. Had the signal not been misunderstood You would end up with two "I"-class trying to finish one BLÜCHER (instead of two "I" + PRINCESS ROYAL & TIGER as historical). Independent of this action, You would still have HMS LION knocked out of action already and dead in the water waiting to be towed away and the PR (in good figthing order) and TIGER (damaged) charging the remaining SEYDLITZ (damaged, lost two after turrets), DEFFLINGER (in good fighting order, hit three times, no casualties) & MOLTKE (in good fighting order, not hit at all). Two versus three are very negative odds. HMS NEW ZEALAND doesn´t have the speed to join them. The hit ratio was very much in disfavour for the british battlecruisers for the whole of the action, despite the long range advantage and in a slugout their 13.5in Mk1a APC are doing less damage (shattering or bursting in holing on even half cal.thick armour) while the 11.1 & 12in L3.1/3.2 APC can defeat up to 2/3 cal armour and burst behind.
Hipper had the problem of running short in ammunition sooner than later but he was getting closer to his bases and the main battle fleet was coming, too. The gun statistic is a very one sided one in a prolonged action. TIGER and PRINCESS ROYAL get 16 x 13.5in, while the remaining german ships can respond with 16 x 11.1in + 8 x 12in.

Byron Angel wrote:If it is a question of serving under one or the other in a naval battle, it is Hipper without a moment's hesitation.

For all his personal charisma and physical courage, Beatty was a poor tactician on his best day. The battlecruiser force was IIRC his very first multi-ship command and it showed.

B

The problem is that it wasn't Beatty's first proper command - he'd commanded the Sixth Cruiser Squadron in the 1912 annual manoeuvres (which were always accompanied by a bevy of tactical exercises), and he'd gone through the Royal Naval War College, where he came out well, apparently. By Jutland he'd been continuously at sea for over three years.

Off the top of my head, Hipper at least had something of a clear remit as BdA, as well as having been afloat with the Reconnaissance Forces as a Flag Officer since 1911. Beatty on the other hand had had to grapple with what to do first with one battle cruiser squadron, then becoming senior cruiser admiral in the Grand Fleet (Cruiser Force A), and finally Vice-Admiral Commanding the Battle Cruiser Fleet. There seems to have been a rather naive assumption that he would be more than capable of taking on whatever was thrown at him.

As to Hipper, I've always wondered at why he was/is supposed to be so amazing - Marder called him the "outstanding sea officer" of the war if memory serves. A good, experienced, competent leader, no doubt. But at Jutland he defeated Beatty largely due to the former's own ineptness, and led the High Sea Fleet straight to the Grand Fleet Battle Fleet, having been boxed about by Hood and the 3.B.C.S. That's hardly good reconnaissance.

But when push comes to shove, I'd take Hipper over Beatty any day.

Simon

I recall reading somewhere that Hipper was "the only commander on both sides to have done everything right" at Jutland. It seems the majority opinion is that Hipper is the better commander. On the other hand, who to server under? Well, Hipper's battlecruisers certainly got out more than the rest of the High Seas Fleet--and that's got to count for something, but then so did Beatty's. And one thing you could say about Beatty, he wasn't going to turn and run (at least not intentionally)!

I'd have to say, serving under a dashing commander, in big, fast ships, and given the heaps of positive publicity given the British battlecruiser force (and, yes, its commander), I'd be tempted to say I'd rather serve under Beatty (one would likely get more rounds bought FOR them in town serving under Beatty than Hipper, perhaps). Maybe not in an actual battle, tho (the rounds one gets there are of a different nature, and maybe not so positive!).

Just look at Beatty's casualties in comparison of those of Hipper... in ships and men. No doubt that Hipper is the closest thing to a life insurance.

Karl Heidenreich wrote:Just look at Beatty's casualties in comparison of those of Hipper... in ships and men. No doubt that Hipper is the closest thing to a life insurance.

I think all of you are right!
Beatty damm near lost all his battlecruisers, if it had'nt been for the intervention of the Grand Fleet Battleships (in particular the QE class) Lion (and Beatty) would probably been sunk along with the rest of them.
The battle turn away by the High Seas fleet might be seen by some as cowardly or running away, but in fact it was a master stroke to extricate his ships from almost certain disaster, it saved his ships and enabled the Germans to keep a 'fleet in being' so the RN could never drop their guard.

Scheer. Beatty was a backstabbing ahole.

Yeah, the more I read about Beatty, especially his behavior after the battle in the controversy with Jellicoe, the less I like the man.

Maybe it wasn't just a dissatisfaction with his sexual prowess that led his wife to try to screw every officer under his command...