Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

From the birth of the Dreadnought to the period immediately after the end of World War I.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7514
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by RF » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:43 am

Following Karl's entry about Pearl Harbor 68 years ago, let us not forget another naval action that took place 95 years ago in the far South Atlantic.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

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

Re: Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by Karl Heidenreich » Tue Dec 08, 2009 3:41 pm

Yes, the Germans lost 1,871 men killed, plus 215 captured. The British lost 10 men plus 19 wounded. Quite a debacle.

We must consider, also, the previous battle in which Spee´s Squadron fought against the British off the coast of El Coronel in which some 1,570 english sailors perished. In that ocassion the Germans only had 3 wounded.

Both actions accounted for more casualties than Pearl Harbor itself: No History Channel documentary nor special reminders, no nothing.
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: Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by Kyler » Tue Dec 08, 2009 10:27 pm

It is unfortunate that we forget such important dates these days, especially ones from the first World War 1.
"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
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7514
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by RF » Wed Dec 09, 2009 8:47 am

Karl Heidenreich wrote: also, the previous battle in which Spee´s Squadron fought against the British off the coast of El Coronel in which some 1,570 english sailors perished. In that ocassion the Germans only had 3 wounded.
Karl, I think you will find that some of the RN dead came from Wales, Scotland and Ireland (including the part of Ireland which is now Eire) and not just England.....and calling them English would get you a punch in the face.....
''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: Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by Gary » Wed Dec 09, 2009 4:24 pm

Hi RF

Karl can beforgiven for his mistake as he is not alone.
At the Nov 11th parade in my town one of the speakers spoke of the "English" dead which prompted a town councillor to submit a letter to the local paper politely reminding him that when he was reading his speech a contingent of Welsh guards were present!!!!
God created the world in 6 days.........and on the 7th day he built the Scharnhorst

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7514
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by RF » Wed Dec 09, 2009 7:35 pm

This is an increasingly sensitive issue, not just for the Scots, Welsh and Irish, but increasingly for the English themselves, particulary when the word ''Britain'' is used for a matter pertaining to England only. I regard myself as English first, British second and European (at least in a political sense) not at all. There are parts of England, such as Cornwall, that some regard as a separate British nation from England.

Scotland has a proud and distinct history, some would say that Scotland was the driving force in the development of the British Empire and in part the Industrial Revolution in Britain.

But that is a separate matter from the title of this forum. Except perhaps to note that the people living in the Falkland Islands, then and now, are proud Britishers.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

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

Re: Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by Karl Heidenreich » Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:30 am

RF:
Karl, I think you will find that some of the RN dead came from Wales, Scotland and Ireland (including the part of Ireland which is now Eire) and not just England.....and calling them English would get you a punch in the face.....

I stand corrected on this issue. No offense intended, just trying to sum up the casualties of such operations and the relative abandon we have for them.
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7514
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by RF » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:21 am

None taken.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
19kilo
Member
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 1:46 am

Re: Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by 19kilo » Wed Sep 28, 2011 12:45 am

Anyone know just how much 12in ammunition Sturdee's force expended to sink the two armored cruisers?

User avatar
Ersatz Yorck
Member
Posts: 141
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:56 pm

Re: Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by Ersatz Yorck » Wed Sep 28, 2011 9:10 am

19kilo wrote:Anyone know just how much 12in ammunition Sturdee's force expended to sink the two armored cruisers?
Almost all of it. I don't have an exact number as I haven't got my books on hand.

Scharnhorst and Gneisenau started the battle with only about half their ammunition, as there was nowhere to repleneish what was used at Coronel.

User avatar
19kilo
Member
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 1:46 am

Re: Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by 19kilo » Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:45 am

That should have been something of a wakeup call to the RN in general and the battlecruiser force in particular.

User avatar
Ersatz Yorck
Member
Posts: 141
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:56 pm

Re: Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by Ersatz Yorck » Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:58 am

I think no one had really envisaged the implications of long range naval combat where hit rates was below 5%. On the other hand, running out of ammunition was rather uncommon. For example, Hipper's battlecruisers at Jutland, surely one of the most engaged squadrons in modern naval history, used less than half of their ammunition during the battle. Ammo expenditure really only was an issue in special cases. The battle of the Falklands (and Coronel) were rather unique in that the battle was fought out without any need for concern about mines, submarines or reinforcing forces, which created a situation where the battle could be fought to a finsh undisturbed so to speak, and then ammo might well run out.

User avatar
Ersatz Yorck
Member
Posts: 141
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:56 pm

Re: Battle of the Falklands: 95 years ago

Post by Ersatz Yorck » Thu Sep 29, 2011 12:43 pm

Quoted from Gary Staff: Battle on the Seven Seas (an excellent book BTW): "Invincible and Inflexible each carried 640 12 inch shells and 24 practice shells, and of these Invincible fired 513 and Inflexible fired 661."

Post Reply