Greatest admiral of all time

[RF]

Yes I was referring to U-39 as that was the time the idea of concentration tactics first occured to him. He had no opportunity in WW1 to try the tactic with other U-boats in company.

[Kyler]

Nelson is the winner hands down in my opinion. While there have been many great admirals in history I don't any of them had the sixth sense that Nelson had in battle.
True he was insubordinate in many cases ignoring orders from the Admiralty, but he perceived the correct reactions in battle. This was amplified because he was also a combat commander, not a desk admiral issuing orders from afar. Many great Admirals had ingenious plans but they faltered under the command of their subordinates. Nelson commanded from the front, in the heat of the battle he let his commanders make their own decisions because he had trained them hard and trusted their judgment. I would say his leadership style was more like an Army General than one of an admiral.

[Adolfo Ceño]

Spanish admiral Blas de Lezo should be included in this Hall of Fame Gallery.
Anyway, my vote is for Nelson... (he was bold enough to disobey admiral Jervis, aka "the Hanger" !!)

[RF]

Blas de Lezo is a new name to me. What are his achievements?

[Adolfo Ceño]

Hello, RF
About Blas de Lezo ...
to begin, just have a look at Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blas_de_Lezo
and his most famous achievement:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_ ... _de_Indias
certainly a man who gained his place in naval warfare history.

[RF]

Yes, an interesting account of a war that hardly features in Briitish history books.

This character was certainly successful in the defence of Cartagena, he took advantage of all the natural features available to him and exploited the dissarray of his enemies.
It would be interesting to have seen him perform as a true naval commander up against someone like Nelson......

[Adolfo Ceño]

Hello again, RF

It would be interesting to have seen him perform as a true naval commander up against someone like Nelson......

It should be very difficult to guess !!

Anyway, I´m still voting for Nelson, … but we can´t forget that the Royal Navy played, obviously, a capital role in all his actions. Not every admiral of other Navies had such an efficient organization in his hands, with well trained crews and ships in sound conditions; and, maybe the most important, with the support of his politicians who understood “the influency of sea power upon History” (Mahan dixit). Thanks them, and also great admirals like Nelson (of course), Britain ruled the waves for a long time…
Unfortunately, the Spanish never had such type of politicians; and even so, sometimes emerged a giant like Blas de Lezo, always surrounded by the general mediocrity and fighting not only with the enemy… but that´s another history.
Regards, and sorry for my bad English!

[Karl Heidenreich]

Nelson.

[RF]

Unfortunately, the Spanish never had such type of politicians;

The politicians were too land minded - as shown in the campaign of 1588.

[David]

There are so many but Cunningham and Collingwood should be mentioned in any British list, both great Admirals, not only as fighters and ship-handlers(Collingwood's action at Cape St. Vincent enabled Nelson to do what he did), but as administrators as well and an Admiral is, first and foremost, an administrator. Nelson's genius was his ability to inspire people he hadn't met, who had not before served under him, his belief in the common sailor- "Aft the more honour, forward, the better man." He was able to delegate and he was fortunate in having the best assembly of Captains and junior Admirals ever seen: Troubridge, Foley, Hood, Hardy, Berry, Saumerez, Blackwood, Freemantle, Collingwood and a host of others. Remember that the great Pellew and Cochrane, although contemporaries, never served under Nelson, yet they were remarkable in their own right. All of these giants were overshadowed by Nelson but as the old saying goes, "A leader is known by the stature of his subordinates."

[RF]

Having considered the above post, I wonder how forum members might rate Winston Churchill as a naval leader?

[David]

I wouldn't rate Churchill at all. He cost the British dearly in naval (and military) matters (Norway, Crete, Force Z and others) and the only reason he didn't cost them more is that some Admirals (notably Tovey and Cunningham) stood up to him. We are only now getting out from under the Churchill as all seeing, all dancing strategist view of WWII, which- when we chase back the paperwork far enough, find was Churchill's view of himself.

[RF]

I don't agree. For starters without Churchil this country would have jacked it all in along with the French in June 1940. It was Churchill who insisted on seeing the Dunkirk evacuations through. As for Norway, Churchill inspired the German invasion in the first place, ordering Cossack to intercept Altmark. And the German naval losses, particulary in destroyers, made Sea Lion a virtual impossibility.

Crete was a disaster - for the Germans. They only just took the island, and Hitler forbade any further use of airborne troops on a large scale as a result. It also made any serious land assault on Malta virtually impossible. The defence of Crete also stopped the German encroachments on Turkey and Syria.

These ''mistakes'' by Churchill all backfired on the Axis. Even the fate of Force Z provided the Allies with lessons which shortened the war, and later yielded dividends.

So if you had a choice of Churchill, Chamberlain or Halifax as your C in C who would you rather have? Do you want a ''loose cannon''winner or a defeatist loser?

[frankwl]

I notice that the great Danish admiral Juel doesn't even make the list although his tactics of breaking the line and achieving local superiority anticipated Nelson by many years. And Juel was fighting other Scandanavians, the toughest sailors that ever put to sea. Hell, I'll vote for Nelson for his personal courage and determination and ultimate impact on world history but he shouldn't eclipse all other great commanders, especially the Scandanavians and the Dutch.The history of Dutch seapower is unbelievalbe for a small, vulnerable country. Nor should we ignore the Americans. Nimitz held a hemisphere in his hand at a crucial moment, closed it and crushed the very competent Empire of Japan. Spruance took one of the greatest gambles in naval history and won against all odds.

[RF]

crushed the very competent Empire of Japan. Spruance took one of the greatest gambles in naval history and won against all odds.

competant? I don't think so. The Empire of Japan was brutal but competant it was not.