SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Sub/Naval + Other Games > Sub/Naval & General Games Discussion > Jutland
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-16-20, 08:03 AM   #1
cheeky_kaleun
Watch
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 24
Downloads: 3
Uploads: 0
Default Wow! Jutland as it was meant to look!

I've mentioned in a previous thread that Jutland has returned, the team managing the game are engaging with customers again, helping with any issues and replying to tickets. I've had a marvelous time the last month replaying this game, creating my own scenarios.

I was playing on a small windowed version, I just discovered the settings that allow me to play in its full 1920 x 1080 - 32 bit glory. This is the way the game was meant to look. Anyway, here is a gorgeous picture from a scenario of my own creation, a convoy of mine from America (in 1917) with ten ships carrying important cargo (aircraft engines? something like that) is being escorted by two pre-dreadnoughts, HMS Canopus and HMS Ocean. I also have several armoured cruisers of the Minotaur / Black Prince type, and my light cruisers scouting ahead have just encountered the German destroyers and light cruisers. There must be a german battle fleet in the area! (because I made the scenario, I know there is; it's a battle line of three Nassau class dreadnoughts and five Deutschland pre-dreads.

There are four Queen Elizabeth-class super-dreadnoughts well to the north carrying out manoeuvres and gunnery drills, but it's 70 kilometers north so it would take almost 2 hours at 21 knots to join the convoy (they are fully laden with fuel and ammo so they cannot make their top trials speed).

I also have two battlecruisers 50 kilometers east of the convoy, the HMS Repulse and the HMS Princess Royal. In their loading condition, the Repulse can make a full 27 knots, and Princess Royal only 23. I've just decided to split them up, due to Repulse having oil-fired engines that give off less smoke, its high speed and 15-inch guns give it superior gunnery range, I'm sending the Repulse north to scout for the main German battle line (it's cloudy, rainy and foggy, visibility is down to 23km).

Here is a picture of the two mighty battlecruisers parting company to pursue their respective missions. Princess Royal has peeled off to the west and left the two-ship division in which Repulse was in the van.

I strongly encourage all of you to give Jutland a try again, I know the sales/support/Steam-like distribution system haven't been perfect and they seemed to go radio-silent for a while. But these issues have been resolved, since I re-initiated contact about a month ago they have been completely professional, supportive and empathetic. It's a magnificent game, it's been so educational for me. Please, please try it if you're a World War 1 naval buff.


Last edited by cheeky_kaleun; 08-16-20 at 10:08 AM. Reason: Adding comment about positive changes in Customer Service at SES
cheeky_kaleun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-20, 08:46 AM   #2
cheeky_kaleun
Watch
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 24
Downloads: 3
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomizer View Post
YouTube Naval presenter Drachinifel has produced a three-part series on the battle. See his YouTube home page here:

Drachinifel

-C
Cheers, I did start watching the Drachnifel Part 1 on Jutland. I couldn't find parts 2 and 3, have they been released yet or are they still in the pipeline?

I just quoted you into this thread as I managed to update the graphics settings on Jutland for 1920x1080 32 bit and take advantage of every graphical setting that my mid-2010s gaming computer could handle on a game made in 2007. See above for HMS Princess Royal peeling off from the Repulse, which was leading its two-ship division, as they separate to undertake separate missions.

Thanks indeed for the information on range-finding. Surely though one would have to admit that in terms of shooting, fire allocation and hits on target, at least during the "Run to the South", Beatty got his ass handed to him even if we ignore the battlecruiser flaws. Germans got more than twice as many heavy calibre shells onto the battlecruisers than they received in return. Was it just that Hipper and the German battlecruisers got lucky?

I was also wondering, as someone with 50 years of expertise in this area, what do you think about the convoy scenario I created, and specifically, how credible is it that a German battleline of three Nassau-class dreadnoughts (which didn't even have FC directors / computers, only centralised fire control i.e. fire all main battery at once although Nassau as I said could fire their A turrent and two wing turrets all in the forward direction) and five pre-dreadnought Deutschland class could inflict the damage I set out below.

The German battleline had a total of fifty-six 28cm guns versus thirty-two 15-inch guns of the QEs. Keep in mind the QEs course was 180 south and the German battleline sailing essentially 270 west with adjustments for interception. I suppose keep in mind that at any one time, the German battleline should only have been able to train only 19 28cm guns at my line of QEs encompassing their forward-firing big guns, whereas I could train all 32 of my 15-inch guns. My strategy was (contrary to Beatty's strategy of matching ship for ship) to concentrate all my fire from the QEs onto the lead ship, finish it off, then take out the next one.

One we closed to about 5,000 years things got ugly as the German battle line turned, numerous torpedoes were launched by both sides as we were that close. End result;

Royal Navy
Loses two Queen Elizabeth-class battlecruisers out of four present, two remaining heavily damaged and disengaging from battle area
Loses one armoured cruiser
Loses two light cruisers

German Navy
Lost three dreadnoughts, two pre-dreadnought Deutschland class, one pre-dreadnought light-to-moderate damage with fires and propulsion issues
Lost one light cruiser
Lost three destroyers

I suppose on paper, it doesn't seem like a terrible outcome, at the end of the battle two additional armoured cruisers were arriving and were chasing and firing 9.2inch guns at the fleeing German pre-dreads, the three remaining, as they fled north. And my convoy was safe. However, losing two Queen Elizabeths felt like a heavy blow, somehow I expected four QEs to have eight German battleships for breakfast.

In light of your knowledge of WW1 naval matters, what do you think? Is this a plausible engagement and result?

(incidentally, I've found HMS Agincourt, even with its primitive fire control, is a marvelous addition to any battle line; with its unprecedented and never matched 7 turrets and 14 x 12-inch guns, particularly when closing below 10,000 years. Because of its primitive fire control, it fires all main guns at once in a broadside shot, it's like this shotgun blast of fourteen 12-inch shells and when they find their target and 14 large calibre shells (or close to it, maybe a few overshoot) hit their target, it's just devastating.

Anyway sorry for the overlong response and again asking for your expert opinion, and also hoped you might enjoy the high definition picture of the battlecruisers (click on the picture to go full screen for full appreciation) in my re-jigged scenario in which I hope I can draw the German battleline into attacking the convoy.

Last edited by cheeky_kaleun; 08-16-20 at 10:16 AM. Reason: Re-editing for clarity
cheeky_kaleun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-20, 03:07 PM   #3
Randomizer
Watch Officer
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 334
Downloads: 131
Uploads: 0


Default

First off, I claim no particular expertise but the battle has held my imagination for many years and I have war gamed it since 1968. I have read extensively and from a wide variety of sources but do not take my word for anything by itself.

Here's Drachinfel's Jutland

and:

There were several convoy defence actions but all were in the North Sea. In October 1917 cruisers SMS Bremse and Brummer almost wiped out a Bergen to Edinburgh convoy sinking two destroyers and nine of eleven merchant ships without getting their paint scratched. After this disaster the Admiralty tasked a division of dreadnoughts (and occasionally an entire battle squadron) from the Grand Fleet to cover (not close escort) the Scandinavian convoys.

In April 1918 Scheer took the entire High Seas Fleet to sea with the aim of destroying both a convoy and its covering force but the sortie was a fiasco. There was no convoy at sea and SMS Moltke dropped a propeller, which caused a turbine to overspeed and explode, wrecking the ship and bringing her close to sinking. This demonstrates how far the Fleet had deteriorated since well maintained ships do not generally shed a propeller at cruising speed.

So your scenario is certainly plausible with the caveat that the Germans lacked the endurance to operate in the Atlantic and so your convoy actions should be in the North Sea. Staring in 1916 there were regular convoys between Norway and the UK and from the start of the War, small "coal convoys" escorted by older destroyers and torpedo-gunboats sailed up and down Britain's east coast. The Germans achieved two successful interceptions of the Norwegian convoys but never seriously disrupted the coal convoys.

The only time the German battlefleet operated in the Atlantic was on exercise in 1911 and for less than two-days. In the spring of 1914, two Kaiser Class battleships sailed from Buenos Aires, Argentina to Wilhelmshaven without refuelling, which was a pretty respectable achievement for a capital ship fitted with coal fired propulsion. However, the voyage was through the Channel (which would be closed by the War) and the cruising speed was a stately 12-knots, fully four-knots less than the High Seas Fleet cruising speed.

Scheer knew that no Atlantic operations were possible for his regular surface warships. Only armed merchant cruisers and U-Boats could interdict Britain's sea lines of communications. This is why the oft-quoted Churchill pronouncement that "Jellicoe is the only man who could lose the War in an afternoon" is merely dramatic Churchillian hyperbole endlessly parroted, often by people who should know better.

Anyway, nice pics.

-C
Randomizer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-20, 07:06 PM   #4
cheeky_kaleun
Watch
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 24
Downloads: 3
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomizer View Post
Scheer knew that no Atlantic operations were possible for his regular surface warships. Only armed merchant cruisers and U-Boats could interdict Britain's sea lines of communications. This is why the oft-quoted Churchill pronouncement that "Jellicoe is the only man who could lose the War in an afternoon" is merely dramatic Churchillian hyperbole endlessly parroted, often by people who should know better.

Anyway, nice pics.

-C
Was it hyperbole? A point I made by, I believe, Jackie Fisher was that you go to war with the Navy you have, any anything you can build (which isn't much, battleships take years to build). If you lose an entire corps and 300,000 men son the Western Front, in 3 months you can replace them.

Think about a situation where at Jutland the Grand Fleet had suffered a profound disaster. Imagine a situation where four of Beatty's six battlecruisers had been destroyed, Beatty himself killed, Jellicoe was unable to form his dreadnoughts into a single battle-line and "cross the T", suffered terrible torpedo attacks and lost 10 dreadnoughts as well as 4 battlecruisers.

That would put Britain and Germany at around parity. It's highly questionable whether the Royal Navy could have maintained its "distant blockade" strategy without the immense superiority it enjoyed over the High Seas Fleet. Yes, the German submarine and anti-convoy effort was important. But even more important was the British blockade of German trade, the "turnip winter" of 1916, the deprivation that was so severe that it resulted in a revolution in 1918 and the toppling of the House of Hohenzollern.

If Jellicoe had ever suffered a disaster at a battle, it would have occurred in or around a single day, and it's possible that from them on Britain would;

(1) No longer be able to enforce its blockade of Germany
(2) Not have the resources to stop the German sub menace

As Beatty himself said later, "When you're winning, risk nothing". And the Brits were winning. But loss of naval superiority could have had profound effects on the war, the Entente only just barely won the war as it is. It was a "close run thing".

Late here so I will reply to the substantive other elements tomorrow, thanks indeed for the detailed responses. Good night!
cheeky_kaleun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-20, 07:08 PM   #5
cheeky_kaleun
Watch
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: London, UK
Posts: 24
Downloads: 3
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomizer View Post
Anyway, nice pics.
-C
Check the ones out in this thread. For some reason I love those armoured cruisers and those old pre-dreadnoughts. Did you know that on the eve of war in 1914, Britain had 40 pre-dreadnoughts? That's insane, I know they were supposedly "obsolete" but imagine what 40 pre-dreadnoughts could have added to the Grand Fleet at Jutland if you could manoeuvre them into position quickly enough (perhaps sending them south first to cut Sheer off)
cheeky_kaleun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-16-20, 11:07 PM   #6
Randomizer
Watch Officer
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 334
Downloads: 131
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
(1) No longer be able to enforce its blockade of Germany
This is incorrect because it was a Distant Blockade for a reason.

The blockading ships were mostly in the Atlantic and beyond the reach of the German fleet. After the old Naval Defence Act protected cruisers were deleted, it was conducted by the armed merchant cruisers and boarding steamers of the 10th Cruiser Squadron. The Grand Fleet supported these ships but the reality is that they were mostly stationed too far from Wilhemshaven for the Germans to attack them. Even had they solved the problem of fuel and the inability to coal at sea, the anti-blockade forces would still have to have run the gauntlet of British submarines in the Helgoland Bight. Twice.

The RN subs in the Bight choke-point torpedoed German capital ships no less than six times across the course of the war. Although none were sunk, the victims needed dockyard attention in every case. The U-Boats failed against the Grand Fleet dreadnoughts although they did score some light cruisers and a few pre-dreadnought battleships. Part of the problem was that the British could always evade the U-Boat traps until they got close to their own coast when destroyer sub-hunting groups and the Royal Naval Air Service could keep the U-Boats submerged. U-Boats did sink a number of AMCs and boarding steamers but arguably these boats attacking the blockaders meant that they were not attacking the all-important merchants.

Quote:
(2) Not have the resources to stop the German sub menace
Sorry but this makes zero sense.

Less than half of the British destroyer fleet was screening the dreadnoughts of the Grand Fleet and the latter were useless in fighting the U-Boats. When Rosslyn Wymess replaced Jellicoe at the Admiralty, Beatty free gave up many of his destroyers for the anti U-Boat war. After August 19th 1916 the Grand Fleet was at sea in its entirety exactly twice. Once in April 1918 in a vain attempt to catch Scheer's Stavanger operation and once in November to accept the High Seas Fleet surrender. A big reason for this was that destroyers had been detached to protect trade.

Quote:
That would put Britain and Germany at around parity. It's highly questionable whether the Royal Navy could have maintained its "distant blockade" strategy without the immense superiority it enjoyed over the High Seas Fleet.
In order for this to be true you need to demonstrate how the High Seas Fleet can operate in the Atlantic and close Britain's west coast ports. Precision is essential here since coal-burning battleships needed to coal weekly at a minimum and sailing to blockading positions off Western Approaches would take at least two full sailing days. Remember you cannot refuel at sea and each sortie generally means a week of maintenance. Crunch the numbers, they fail for Germany completely.

According to Mahanian theory, losing a major battle at sea meant loss of sea control but the Great War at Sea did not conform to Mahan's dictum's. rather Julian Corbett had foreseen the naval war in 1912 and it pretty much played out according to his predictions. The decisive naval theatre was Western Approaches and the GIUK Gaps not the North Sea. Wilhelmine Germany could not exert sea power west of the British Isles, only sea denial with U-Boats. Geography ensured that no German surface fleet could impose a blockade on the UK given the means available at the time.

The High Seas Fleet was strategically irrelevant and in the unlikely event that it had inflicted a punishing tactical defeat of the Royal Navy, the results would have in all probability been exactly the same as actually happened. Sorry, the last time that battleships would affect the fate of nations at war was in 1904-05 when Japan fought Czarist Russia.

Beatty's "When you're winning, risk nothing" was exactly the same strategy used by Jellicoe 1914-16 and proposed by Callaghan even before him.

-C
Randomizer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.