SMS Lutzow (1916)

From the birth of the Dreadnought to the period immediately after the end of World War I.
User avatar
Kyler
Senior Member
Posts: 382
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:49 am
Location: Evansville, IN U.S.A.
Contact:

SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby Kyler » Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:34 am

SMS Lutzow was one of three Derfflinger Class battlecruisers that were served in the Imperial German Navy during World War 1.
She had a short but distinguished career in the navy being the only battlecruiser in the German Navy that was sunk during the entire war.
She was commissioned in November of 1916 after being completed by the Blohm & Voss company. She was quickly used as a flagship for the Reconnaissance Squadron. She served as Adm. Hipper's flagship during initial parts of the Battle of Jutland. Lutzow by some sources is accredited in the sinking of the HMS Defence, destroying HMS Lion's Q turret, and in possible sinking of the HMS Invincible. In the end Lutzow was hit 24 times during the battles with the BC Fleet and Grand Fleet at Jutland. She limped back to Kiel but was unable to be saved due to the amount of water that had flooded compartments. She was scuttled by a German torpedo boat after the surviving crew had been rescued.

Lutzow's main armament consisted of 8 12"/50 SK L/50 guns on centerline superfiring turrets. Her secondary armament consisted of 14 5.9"/45 SK L/45 guns in single casemates above the hull, 8 3.5"/45 SK L/45 single mount guns, and 4 19.7" underwater torpedo tubes ( 1stern, 1astern firing, and 2 broadside tubes)

Displacement 26,600 tons/31,200 tons max.
Dimensions: Length 690'3", Beam: 95'1", Draft: 31'5"
Engines: 4 Steam Turbine, 14 Twin Coal Boilers, 4 Oil Double Ended Boilers, SHP 63,000
Max speed: 26.5 knots (Tested at 27+), 6,100 kn miles at 14kn.
Wartime Crew: 1,390 men

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
"It was a perfect attack, Right Height, Right Range, Right cloud cover, Right speed,
Wrong f@%king ship!" Commander Stewart-Moore (HMS Ark Royal)

Gerard Heimann
Supporter
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:30 pm
Location: Bay Shore, NY, USA

Re: SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby Gerard Heimann » Thu Sep 10, 2009 6:53 pm

Any thoughts why Caesar turret is further distant from Dora than is Bruno from Anton? The decking structure appears the same, yet the distance between the two superfiring sets is different.

Gerard

User avatar
tommy303
Senior Member
Posts: 1526
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:19 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby tommy303 » Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:29 pm

The machinery spaces for turbines was in between Caesar and Dora.

Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
They stood and Earth's foundations stay;
What God abandoned these defended;
And saved the sum of things for pay.

User avatar
Kyler
Senior Member
Posts: 382
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:49 am
Location: Evansville, IN U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby Kyler » Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:35 pm

Gerard Heimann wrote:Any thoughts why Caesar turret is further distant from Dora than is Bruno from Anton? The decking structure appears the same, yet the distance between the two superfiring sets is different.

Gerard


Tommy is correct

This design feature was common on all three Derfflinger Class battlecrusiers, and also on the never completed Mackensen & Ersatz-Yorck Class Battlecruisers
"It was a perfect attack, Right Height, Right Range, Right cloud cover, Right speed,
Wrong f@%king ship!" Commander Stewart-Moore (HMS Ark Royal)

User avatar
marcelo_malara
Senior Member
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
Location: buenos aires

Re: SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby marcelo_malara » Thu Sep 10, 2009 11:04 pm

Alternating machinery spaces was a common design practice of the era. I mean, you can find:

-boiler room/machinery room/boiler room/machinery room
-boiler room/machinery room/boiler room

Surely there are other combinations. I read that they were so disposed to diminish the risk of some part of the powerplant being entirely disabled by a single impact. But then the design turned to the standard boiler room/machinery room. I think there were limitations with the lenght of the shafts as the BBs grew in size.

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby Karl Heidenreich » Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:11 am

The German Battlecruisers were the best of the world when they engaged the enemies. Far superior to their foes.
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

User avatar
Kyler
Senior Member
Posts: 382
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:49 am
Location: Evansville, IN U.S.A.
Contact:

Re: SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby Kyler » Fri Sep 11, 2009 1:17 am

Karl Heidenreich wrote:The German Battlecruisers were the best of the world when they engaged the enemies. Far superior to their foes.


Absolutely, it was the SMS 3 v RN 1, no you don't get to count the Blucher you RN fan it is an Armored Cruiser
"It was a perfect attack, Right Height, Right Range, Right cloud cover, Right speed,
Wrong f@%king ship!" Commander Stewart-Moore (HMS Ark Royal)

lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3810
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby lwd » Mon Sep 14, 2009 12:48 pm

Nice photos and posting. Probably a good idea to credit them though.

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

Re: SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby RF » Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:32 pm

Kyler wrote:SMS Lutzow was..... the only battlecruiser in the German Navy that was sunk during the entire war.
..... Lutzow was hit 24 times during the battles with the BC Fleet and Grand Fleet at Jutland. She limped back to Kiel but was unable to be saved due to the amount of water that had flooded compartments. She was scuttled by a German torpedo boat after the surviving crew had been rescued.



It is a moot point as to whether this is a sinking as such, or effectively the scrapping of a ship badly damaged in battle. The Seydlitz was in a similar position, but did survive the war.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

downes51
Junior Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:49 pm

Re: SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby downes51 » Mon Nov 09, 2009 12:05 pm

She was commissioned in November of 1916 after being completed by the Blohm & Voss company.


That would be 5 months after she was sunk at Jutland!

Wiki says she was launched in November 1913 and commissioned in August 1915.

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

Re: SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby RF » Mon Nov 09, 2009 2:19 pm

Wasn't the commissioning in November 1916 that of a successor ship to the name?
''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

Re: SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby Gary » Tue Nov 17, 2009 7:07 pm

Formidable ships for their time :clap:

I believe the forward torpedo room which wasnt covered by the armour belt was hit by 12 inch shells (possibly from Invincible) which quickly began to flood.
The flooding of the bows caused her stern to rise up and her screws and Rudder began to lift out of the water.
I think from memory she had over 8000 tons of sea water flooding her compared to about 5000 for Seydlitz.
God created the world in 6 days.........and on the 7th day he built the Scharnhorst

Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 643
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: SMS Lutzow (1916)

Postby Thorsten Wahl » Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:55 pm

some concentrated Information about her sinking
in german
http://forum-marinearchiv.de/smf/index. ... 482.0.html
Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!


Return to “The Dreadnought Era (1906-1921)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest