The Greatest Naval Battle in History

General naval discussions that don't fit within any specific time period or cover several issues.

Which was the greatest naval battle in history?

Salamis (480 BC)
11
7%
Lepanto (1571)
10
6%
Spanish Armada (1588)
3
2%
Trafalgar (1805)
26
16%
Tsushima (1905)
10
6%
Jutland (1916)
19
12%
Pursuit and Sinking of the Bismarck (1941)
8
5%
Midway (1942)
25
16%
Leyte (1944)
40
25%
Other
7
4%
 
Total votes : 159

The Greatest Naval Battle in History

Postby Javier L. » Sat Jun 25, 2005 5:31 pm

Hello all,

Considering the following factors:

> Number of warships involved
> Number of men involved
> Number of warships and men lost
> Consequences and importance of the battle result.

What do you think was the greatest naval battle in history?

Salamis (480 BC)
Lepanto (1571)
Trafalgar (1805)
Tsushima (1905)
Jutland (1916)
Midway (1942)
Other (say which one)

:D
User avatar
Javier L.
Member
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Madrid (España)

Re: The Greatest Naval Battle in History

Postby Tiornu » Sat Jun 25, 2005 8:47 pm

I believe Leyte had the greatest number of ships involved, but Jutland had a greater tonnage of ships involved.
Tiornu
Supporter
 
Posts: 1222
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:13 am
Location: Ex Utero

Postby Ulrich Rudofsky » Sat Jun 25, 2005 10:08 pm

I would say Trafalgar was the most decisive. It put an end to Napoleon's plans to invade England or Ireland, which would have had some very serious consequences for the entire world. Most of the others you mention were great historic contests of naval power, but they did not change the world at that instant all by themselves.
Ulrich
User avatar
Ulrich Rudofsky
Contributor & Translator
 
Posts: 844
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 9:16 pm
Location: State of New York

Re: The Greatest Naval Battle in History

Postby Javier L. » Sat Jun 25, 2005 11:09 pm

Tiornu wrote:I believe Leyte had the greatest number of ships involved, but Jutland had a greater tonnage of ships involved.

Hi Tiornu,

I didn't put Leyte because I consider it a naval campaign consisting of many small engagements (not a single battle), like Guadalcanal, or the battle of the Atlantic 1941-43.
User avatar
Javier L.
Member
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Madrid (España)

Postby cascoskuro » Sat Jun 25, 2005 11:10 pm

It´s not easy.

At the first, Lepanto, when de Liga Santa stopped the ottoman expansion and also Trafalgar.
User avatar
cascoskuro
Member
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 9:13 pm
Location: S/C Tenerife, España

Postby _Derfflinger_ » Sun Jun 26, 2005 12:48 am

I'd vote for Midway. Not the largest number of ships, but huge resulting consequence. Turned the Pacific war around.

VdT
User avatar
_Derfflinger_
Supporter
 
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 5:01 pm
Location: Missouri, USA

Postby Javier L. » Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:39 am

My vote is for Lepanto.

Stats:

> Number of warships involved: About 600 galleys and smaller ships.
> Number of men involved: More than a hundred thousand.
> Number of warships lost: About 30 galleys sunk (15 Christians and 15 Turkish). 190 Turkish galleys captured later.
> Number of men lost: About 38,000 dead (30,000 Turks and 8,000 Christians).
> Consequences and importance of the battle result: Turk expansion stopped and the Western world saved.
User avatar
Javier L.
Member
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Madrid (España)

The Armada

Postby Alfonso Arenas » Sun Jun 26, 2005 2:29 pm

Hi, all

I'm in favour of the spanish 'armada' versus the QE fleet (1588 or circa, I don't remember now). Not only because number of ships, amount of losses and men involved, but for the consequences. Best for England, to be free of catholicism till now. Worst for Spain, to suffer catholicism till now. As many other I suspect that God doesn't exist, by if He exist definetely he is english!

Happy sunday, beware of the blue mondays...

Alfonso
Alfonso Arenas
Junior Member
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:23 pm
Location: Madrid, Spain

Postby tommy303 » Tue Jun 28, 2005 9:33 pm

I think I would throw Salimis into the list, as the victory of the Atenian navy prevented the conquest of Greece by the Persians.

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
tommy303
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1397
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:19 pm
Location: Arizona

Postby Sergio » Sat Sep 17, 2005 7:23 pm

Hello, for me it is LEPANTO.
Sergio
Junior Member
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 6:35 pm
Location: España

Postby Plamen74 » Tue Sep 27, 2005 3:17 pm

I vote for Lepanto - the giant clash of the Cross v. Crescent many ships were destroyed and many thousand were dead.
I wish to add more battles 4 day battle between Dutch and British fleets more than 7000 dead, 21 ships detoyed and captured, Chesma 1770 between Tukish ships and Russian 7000 Turks died and 10 Rrussians
The battle in Vigo bay 7000 Spaniards died in 1704
P.V.
Plamen74
Junior Member
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 8:30 am
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria

Postby marcelo_malara » Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:53 pm

I think Jutland is the greatest CONVENTIONAL (ie: no aircraft carriers) naval battle of all times. This puts Midway and Leyte Gulf out of the discussion.
Think of it: almost 60 battleships and battlecruisers fighting in the North Sea, two British battlecruisers lost with 3000 lives in a matter of minutes.
For comparision, the Kriegsmarine only have 4 battleships in WWII.
I believe that if the losses were no greater was because of the German decision of not fully engaging with the British fleet.
I think, with my limited knowledge of naval history, that there is no other battle in history in which so much firepower was called upon.
User avatar
marcelo_malara
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1072
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
Location: buenos aires

Postby Matthias » Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:01 am

I put Jutland as the biggest, but it was not a decisive battle; infact the Hochseeflotte after Jutland remained in her port, while the naval power of the Grand Fleet was unthouched.

I agree the most decisive battle ever fought has been Trafalgar.And a revolutionary tactic too, when Nelson decided to abandon old line-to-line battle scheme and, as he loved to say, he "headed towards the enemy".
That unespected step and the superiority or british crews and gunnery gave them....the Victory. :angel: :wink:
"Wir kämpfen bis zur letzten Granate."

Günther Lütjens
User avatar
Matthias
Member
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 9:59 pm
Location: Mailand

Postby Karl Heidenreich » Mon Jan 16, 2006 7:23 pm

Jutland. Even if no one had a full victory the consequences were such that, in the end, favored Britain and led Germany to it´s defeat. (WWI was a defeat in that meaning?).
Well, considering it maybe Lepanto, Trafalgar and Midway had the same efect over History and Society.
User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica

Postby Djoser » Fri Feb 03, 2006 5:30 pm

I voted Salamis--on the basis of consequences.

It was probably the closest to altering history radically. And more was at stake than the others--in my opinion.

I have read differing opinions of Lepanto--certainly decisive, but I believe the Turks did rebuild their forces rapidly afterwards. Though of course they might have been so intimidated they never tried so hard again to do what they were trying to do at Lepanto.

Trafalgar was decisive of course, but the French and Spanish were so inferior in the crew and leadership quality as to make an alternative victory over the British navy unlikely, and a successful invasion even more so.

Tsushima was pretty close as well. Certainly the Russians never tried to become a serious naval power after that--until after WW II, that is.

Midway certainly turned the war in the Pacific around, but the Japanese never really stood a chance to win it anyway.

Jutland, in terms of massed firepower, yes--and if the Germans had done substantial damage it could have had disastrous consequences. But that would have been difficult to pull off.

A far more dangerous situation for the British was during one of the raids on the coast--when a substantial but not nearly powerful enough segment of the British fleet came close to being overwhelmed by the Germans. But that's a what-if scenario. Furthermore I believe the Germans came close to having their battlecruisers similarly overwhelmed in the same raid. There were two very close calls, for each side respectively. Sorry to digress, though...
Djoser
Senior Member
 
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 6:45 am
Location: Key West Florida USA

Next

Return to Naval History in General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron