Topic: Ships of WWII Part Two: KM Scharnhorst

[Chris SI]

The 'Lucky Ship'

In 1928 the Germans gave out contracts for three new ships carrying an armament heavier than contemporary cruisers, and with speeds enabling them to evade capital ships of other powers. In fact, orders for turrets for five ships were given but only three 'pocket battleships' were built.

The realization that the French battleship Dunkerque, laid down in 1932, was superior to the new ships led the Germans to consider a new class of vessel, larger, faster and more powerfully-armed than the pocket battleships. These ships were to be the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. They carried the same 11in main armament as the pocket battleships, since reversion to 15in guns would have imposed unacceptable delay on their construction , but they mounted three and not two triple turrets. The Scharnhorst was built at Wilhelmshaven and launched in October 1936. In addition to her main armament she carried twelve 150mm (poorly protected), seven 105mm, sixteen 37mm and ten 20mm AA guns on commissioning in January 1939. Maximum belt armour was 250 mm and for the main armament turrets and control position 350 mm. The hull was double bottomed. Though fine looking ships capable of more than 30 knots, both Scharnhorst and Gneisenau shipped water heavily. the forward turrets often being inoperable in bad weather. The deep load displacement of the Scharnhorst was 38,900 tons.

The Scharnhorst and Gneisenau normally operated together, sinking the Rawalpindi of the Northern Patrol in 1939 and the carrier Glorious and two escorts during the 1940 Norway campaign. In that campaign the Scharnhorst received severe torpedo damage and it was not until 1941 that, with the Gneisenau, she sortied into the Atlantic to account for nineteen merchantmen before making for Brest. Air attack prompted the Germans to bring the ships back to Germany in February 1942, in an operation called "Cerberus," which had them sail through the English channel, which Hitler gambled was not heavily guarded. He was correct, but the Scharnhorst was mined twice on the way. In March 1943 she was sent to northern Norway and, with the Tirpitz, tied down major British units in defence of Arctic convoys until 26th December when, unescorted, she was caught and sunk by the Duke of York and her escorts.

[CaptStumpy]

From what I've read they still intended to convert them to 15" and the casemates were designed to accept them but it was never done.

[Chris SI]

The war started before such a change could be made.

After that, they were in service of repairing battle damage, and after the Battle of the Barents Sea, Hitler tried to scrap what was left of his surface navy!

What the result of Scharnhorst's final action would have been if she had 15 inch guns is only conjecture, but its doubtful the Duke Of York would have had such a one-sided time against her.

[KnightAdvancer]

The Scharnhorst and Gneisenau normally operated together, sinking the Rawalpindi of the Northern Patrol in 1939

The Rawalpindi is an interesting tale. Launch in 1925 as a 16,600 ton passenger ship she was requisitioned by the British Navy in 1939 and armed with eight six-inch guns of World War One vintage. On a patrol between Iceland and Faeroes she ran into the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. She ignore the signals and warning shots to heave to and abandon ship by the Scharnhorst, and opened fired to no effect.  The Captain of the HMS Rawalpindi, Edward Coverley Kennedy, was quoted as saying, "We'll fight them both, they'll sink us - and that will be that. Goodbye" and that's exactly what happened.

There were 38 survivors, out of a crew of 276. Ludovic Kennedy, son of Edward Kennedy, particiated in the sinking of the Bismark later on in the war, made a famous book and documentary about it, and became a member of the British parliament.

[Just plain old Punisher]

The surface raiders were a waste of resources. Considering the converted merchant raiders, like the Komet, sunk more ships than the pocket battleships.

[IndyShark]

The war started before such a change could be made.

After that, they were in service of repairing battle damage, and after the Battle of the Barents Sea, Hitler tried to scrap what was left of his surface navy!

What the result of Scharnhorst's final action would have been if she had 15 inch guns is only conjecture, but its doubtful the Duke Of York would have had such a one-sided time against her.

I don't think larger guns would have helped Scharnhorst. She never landed a shot on the Duke of York. The British radar controlled gunnery crippled and sank the Scharnhorst before it could fight back.

[J. Carney]

The war started before such a change could be made.

After that, they were in service of repairing battle damage, and after the Battle of the Barents Sea, Hitler tried to scrap what was left of his surface navy!

What the result of Scharnhorst's final action would have been if she had 15 inch guns is only conjecture, but its doubtful the Duke Of York would have had such a one-sided time against her.

I don't think larger guns would have helped Scharnhorst. She never landed a shot on the Duke of York. The British radar controlled gunnery crippled and sank the Scharnhorst before it could fight back.

Lack of good RADAR for fire control on thier ships told on both the Kriegsmarine and the IJN.

Scharnhorst would not have been saved by it, though. Numbers can be telling on the lone raider. Though it would have made a diference in some battles (especially in the Pacific for Japan.

[kmelew]

Lack of good RADAR for fire control on thier ships told on both the Kriegsmarine and the IJN.

Scharnhorst would not have been saved by it, though. Numbers can be telling on the lone raider. Though it would have made a diference in some battles (especially in the Pacific for Japan.

At the Battle of Midway, the battleships Ise and Hyuga were equipped with radar, but assigned to the Aleutian task force.  One has to wonder what would have happened had they been assigned to Nagumo's First Air Fleet...

[Chris SI]

Larger guns may have saved Scharnhorst in her last fight.

Duke of York knocked out the Scharnhorst's firecontrol radar early in the fight, before the German ship was in battle range. With a heavier main battery, its possible that Scharnhorst would have gotten in the first punch.

Keep in ming the Duke of York only had 14 inch cannons, not the standard 15 inch of the older royal navy battle fleet (or the 16 inchers of the superior American designs.)

Duke of York was a compromise design to fit the London naval treaty.

[Just plain old Punisher]

The Brittish simply sent Battleships to escort the convoys. Unable to really take on a battleship, the surface-warship raider was next to useless.

The Germans simply couldn't compete with the Brittish when it came to capital ships. IMHO, they would have been better off completing their Carrier the Graf Zepplin.

[IndyShark]

Larger guns may have saved Scharnhorst in her last fight.

Duke of York knocked out the Scharnhorst's firecontrol radar early in the fight, before the German ship was in battle range. With a heavier main battery, its possible that Scharnhorst would have gotten in the first punch.

Keep in ming the Duke of York only had 14 inch cannons, not the standard 15 inch of the older royal navy battle fleet (or the 16 inchers of the superior American designs.)

Duke of York was a compromise design to fit the London naval treaty.

Chris, when I read "The Drama of the Scharnhorst" by Fritz-Otto Busch he said that range had nothing to do with the loss of the ship. The Duke of York sank the Scharnhorst before she could fine a shot or even target the British battleship. Larger guns would not have mattered without the fire control to shoot back. When the Duke of York got into range, the Scharnhorst was doomed

[Chris SI]

But your last sentance illustrates what I mean, "When Duke of York got in range."

If Scharnhorst had 15inch rifles, she would have had a range advantage on the DoY, she already had a speed advantage. It would have been possibly to maintain firing before the British ship could fire, of course, its all hypothetical, since the engagement was fought in a snowstorm.

[J. Carney]

But your last sentance illustrates what I mean, "When Duke of York got in range."

If Scharnhorst had 15inch rifles, she would have had a range advantage on the DoY, she already had a speed advantage. It would have been possibly to maintain firing before the British ship could fire, of course, its all hypothetical, since the engagement was fought in a snowstorm.

Here is one for you Cris, kinda like what you just mentioned:

The U.S.S. Alabama[/b] (South Dakota-class) and a British cruiser enguaged the Tirpitz[/b] and an German cruiser while escorting a convoy into Murmansk. Foggy N. Atlantic night, with snow and freezing rain.

The Big Al and Tirpitz traded shots, and the two cruisers fired on each other. Only one broadside was fired from each ship- just enough for both sides to realize that they were facing capital ships. This persuaded the Germans to move off- they couldn't risk loosing Tirpitz.

If all things were equal, which would you say would come out on top (something so close wouldn't have produced a winner- just a survivor, IMHO) Alabama or Tirpitz?

Alabama's specs:

Displacement:     35,000 to 44,500 tons.
Length:    680 ft.
Beam:    108 ft. 2 in.
Height of truck light
above keel:    194 ft.
Design Draft:    33 ft. 8 in.
Actual weight when
fully loadedf:    42,500 tons.
Speed:    28 knots
Range:    15,000 Nautical miles at 15 knots
Crew:    127 Officers, 2,205 Enlisted Men
Armament:
9       16"/45 cal. Guns (3 turrets)
20    5"/38 cal. Guns (10 mounts)
48    40mm Guns (12 mounts)
52    20mm Guns
Armor:
Turret faces:    18 inches
Conning tower:    16 inches
Side armor:    12.2 inches, tapering to 1 inch at bottom.
Power Plants:
Horsepower:    130,000 hp


Tirpitz specs:
Length
   823 feet 6in (251m)

Beam
   118 feet 1in (36m)

Displacement, Standard
   41676 tons

Displacement, Full Load
   50153 tons

Complement
   2092 men
Catapult / Aircraft    2 mid-mounted / 4 Arado AR 196 aircraft

ARMOR

Belt               12.6in
Main Deck    3.15in
Lower Deck    unknown
Main Turrets    14.2in
Secondary Turrets    unknown
Conning Tower    unknown

ARMAMENTS
Weapon    Layout
8 x 15in guns    4 double turrets
12 x 5.9in guns    6 double turrets
16 x 4.1in guns    8 double turrets
16 x 37mm guns / AA    8 double turrets
12 (16 for Tirpitz)  x 20mm guns / AA    12 single mountings (16 for Tirpitz)
8 x 21in torpedoes (Tirpitz only)    2 quad launchers

MACHINERY:
Propulsion Unit    3 Blohm & Voss turbines, 12 boilers
Shaft    3 shafts
Max. Speed    30.1 knots
Range (without refueling)    8900nm at 17 knots


Just an educated guess, if you would?

[Just plain old Punisher]

Whats the armour thickness of the South Dakotas top decks?

[J. Carney]

Whats the armour thickness of the South Dakotas top decks?

#  Deck:

    * Main: 1.5
    * 2nd: 6"
    * 3rd: .33"

*NOTE: the 'Main Deck' of the U.S.S. Alabama corresponds to the first level of the superstructure on the Iowa's. The armor belt begins on the second deck, and the thickest deck armor as well.

Notice the indention running the length of the second deck begining at the #2 turret. This shows where the armor thins out on the first deck. This was done to save weight on the S.D.-class due to the Washington Treaty, but it didn't deminish their armor protection on vitals.
 They were simply built high and short instead of long and lean like the Iowas.

[Chris SI]

American Battleships from North Carolina forward would have easily defeated the Bismarck class, which was based on the first world war Baden class.

The US ships had excellent firecontrol and a better and heavier main battery, and their armor (up to, but NOT including the Iowas was superior to any BB EXCEPT the Japanese Yamato class) was superior in function and layout.

[J. Carney]

Thanks, I have always wondered what could have happened that night, if the Germans had turned into the convoy instead of away from it.

Could have been the last great hurah for the old one-on-one duel.

[IndyShark]

Larger guns may have saved Scharnhorst in her last fight.

Duke of York knocked out the Scharnhorst's firecontrol radar early in the fight, before the German ship was in battle range. With a heavier main battery, its possible that Scharnhorst would have gotten in the first punch.

Keep in ming the Duke of York only had 14 inch cannons, not the standard 15 inch of the older royal navy battle fleet (or the 16 inchers of the superior American designs.)

Duke of York was a compromise design to fit the London naval treaty.

Chris, the problem for the Scharnhorst was her fire control, not the guns. The conditions at the time were terrible and she had optical fire control. By the time she could have acquire the Duke, she was well within 14" gun range. The Duke did not have that problem and opened fire as soon as she got in range.

The Scharnhorst could have had 16" guns and it would not have mattered on the day she was sunk. If visibility were better, she may have lasted longer, but if the Scharnhorst saw the Duke of York she would have used her speed to escape. She didn't know the Duke was bearing down on her until it was too late....

Fire control was the decisive factor in this battle

[Chris SI]

Not necessarily, as DoY would have been reluctant to close on a ship with heaiver guns than she herself possed.

[IndyShark]

Not necessarily, as DoY would have been reluctant to close on a ship with heaiver guns than she herself possed.

I suppose that is a matter of debate. I don't think a British battleship with the advantage of radar contolled gunnery and with several cruisers and destroyers escorting her would hesitate to attack an 11" or even 15" battlecruiser. 

Remember the Scharnhorst didn't know the Duke of York was there before she opened fire! She tried to run, but by then it was too late.