Page 2 of 17
Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 6:09 am
I voted for Midway. Not the classic big gun battle, but probably the most important naval battle in history in my opinion. The great decisions, skill/bravery and pure luck that helped the Americans win the battle sets it above all others to me. Think about it, Wade McClusky seached in a unusual manner and found the Japanese destroyer that led him to the carriers. The unbelievable luck that led Yorktowns SBDs and Enterprises SBDs to hit 3 carriers at the exact same time. The bravery of the Ameican Torpedo plane crews. The bravery of Japanese flight leader Tomanaga to lead that last attack on the Yorktown in a damaged Kate knowing he would not have fuel to return.
This battle reads like a Hollywood script, in fact its probably better.
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:11 am
I have been bugged by questions about "who is the greatest of them all" all my life, and I have come to the conclusion that there really is no rational answer to that question, and it really does not matter a hell of a lot anyway. Writers, historians and politicians sometimes have odd ways of looking at the truth. But..... an armchair admiral's view of what was the greatest battle or which was the greatest battleship or who was the greatest admiral......seems a waste of time.
greatest naval battle
Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:20 pm
i would vote for trafalgar
that is because, the consequences are the greatest
the number of ships is often similar therfore i think the consequences would be the factor which decides, whihc abttle is the greatest
therefore i would say trafalgar
the win for the royal navy basically ended Napoleon's plans for invasion of UK.
if the battle of the atlantic (1939-45) would be counted as a battle i would vote for that...
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 1:51 am
Eventhough I think it is an unreasonable question, I voted for Trafalgar, too!
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 7:06 pm
Well, in spite of my all-too-easy dismissal of the battle as being as decisive as some of you feel it was...
I'm sure I would have felt differently had I been an Englishman circa 1805, lol!
Posted: Thu Sep 28, 2006 8:05 pm
Trafalgar or Jutland or Midway?
I vote Trafalgar for her importance in the fate of the world.
If the Franco Spanich fleet had defeat her opponent, England fall and her empire with her. You have to erase with a rubb the world map and to rebuilt it. No doubt that Napoleon will fall one day, but the destiny of the world would be changed...
In the other hand and as wrote before, British were so superior in crew and officers quality that only the victory was possible for them.
So we have Jutland and Midway.
Jutland was a wonderfull demonstration of naval warfare but it changed nothing in the destiny of the war.
Midway, as wrote before in this topic, was the hinge in the pacific war...
Trafalgar or midway???
Posted: Fri Sep 29, 2006 11:03 am
been this website about a 'dreadnought ' battleship and ships of that type, my vote goes to Jutland on top of Tsushima.
All the others are very important historical naval battles, comparable or even of a greater importance historically for sure.
Posted: Sun Oct 01, 2006 7:11 am
to get a real result, we have to analyze the criteria of how we assess each battle.
Do we use our personal opinion?
or the amount of ships?
importance to the world?
personal genius of an admiral?
decisivness of a battle?
fairness of the battle?
It would be great if we could analyze these battles after a certain criteria...
Posted: Sun Oct 01, 2006 7:19 am
i don't know...
but would anybody consider voting for Bismarck vs. Hood???
or at least the battle at DS, is one of the most interesting, controversial and i think the only clash between two 50000ton ships in WW2 (britain vs. germany)
i would defiantly vote for it...
ps: or the life of BS, as a whole, one whole battle....why not
Posted: Sun Oct 01, 2006 8:28 am
You are right Miro. The battle at the Denmark Strait may not be the largest nor the most decisive battle, but it is certainly one of the most famous naval engagements ever. I've just added it to the poll.
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 4:03 pm
I agree with the idea of DS. It was a decisive battle, anyway: Mr. Hitler was very demoralized with Raeder´s surface units strategy after that. It influenced the overall conduct of the KM and the RN.
P.S. But, those of us that had already vote are not able to do it again. Can this be fixed?
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:29 pm
Karl Heidenreich wrote:But, those of us that had already vote are not able to do it again. Can this be fixed?
I'm afraid not. Sorry.
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:29 pm
I voted Midway, for two connected reasons:
1) The size and scale of the battle area, including all the diversionary actions, covering a substantial portion of the Pacific Ocean. Much bigger than any previous single battle before it, and probably after.
2) The result was decisive. It ended any chance of a Japanese victory in WW2 by conventional means. It also shortened the war, not just in Asia/Pacific but also in Europe as well, as the US was now free to follow through the 'Germany first' policy and concentrate 85% of its war production on the European/North African theatre.
Posted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:05 am
is not a battle, but the biggest catastrophy at sea at all.
Somewhere due the punian wars the Romans warfleet came into a storm on the way back home and lost 100.000 soldiers and seamen.
Here i voted for Jutland.
Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 4:01 pm
One of Helmut Pemsel's books is in English also. Published by the US Naval Institute Press and now available at Alibris.com for $ 8-18. TITLE: Atlas of naval warfare. Atlas of naval warfareA history of war at sea : an atlas and chronology of conflict at sea from earliest times to the present / Helmut Pemsel ; translated by G.D.G. Smith.
PUBLISHER: Annapolis, Md. : Naval Institute Press, (1979 printing)
SUBJECT: Naval battles.; Naval history - Chronology.;
DOC TYPE: Monograph
PAGINATION: 176 p. : ill., maps ; 26 cm.