Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 5/30/2016 2:19:21 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
The Run to the South

This opening phase of the battlecruiser clash is known as the Run to the South. Each fleet headed in a rough southeasterly direction line astern on a parallel course. The Germans were trying to deliver Beatty to Scheer, while Beatty probably started out believing he could destroy Hipper on his own, but when Scheer made his presence known, it became Beatty's turn to try and deliver both German fleets to Jellicoe (the Run to the North). Ultimately it may well have been the case that Beatty would have had to break off the engagement even if Scheer wasn't at sea due to the punishment his ships took in this opening phase. This was because, in that scenario, so long as Hipper kept Evan-Thomas and his 5BS at a distance, then he could control events until it was time to leave.

"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today"

At 1548hrs Hipper ordered the signal JD "Jot Dora" the signal for fire to commence. It took just three salvoes for Lutzow's shells to begin straddling her opposite number and within minutes, Lion had been hit - more than once. Elsewhere, German gunnery was not much better than the British, but the Germans found the range much quicker no doubt aided by the following (from von Hase again and as detailed in Rules of the Game):

"The English battlecruisers had a decidedly unfavourable tactical position".

1. The visibility facing east was inferior to that facing west
2. Whereas the Germans' gun smoke was quickly driven by wind way over the ship, the westerly breeze was blowing the smoke from the English guns between them and us. As a result of this their view was often hampered.
3. At the same time British smoke hardly inconvenienced the Germans, for their precise stereoscopic range-finders could produce a result from the smallest speck of a masthead



Another breakdown in communication for the British... The plan was for both Lion and Princess Royal to target Lutzow, the German flagship, and all subsequent ships in the line would take the next one along - counting from the rear - thus all German ships would come under fire from at least one battlecruiser. Both Tiger and Queen Mary counted from the front and so targeted Seydlitz and Moltke, leaving Derfflinger unmolested by enemy shells for 10 minutes. Once again this was a mistake that had been made previously - by Tiger at Dogger Bank. It seems almost as if there was no de-brief after previous battles to ensure problems encountered were not eradicated for the next time......



Range-finding equipment

The British used two types of range-finders - the 9ft FQ2 and the 15ft FT24, with the latter being better suited to the longer ranges that naval battles were to be fought at as guns increased in size. All five Queen Elizabeth's had this version but by 1916 only one ship in the Grand Fleet had the FT24, HMS Orion.

One can only imagine what using one of these hand held coincidence range-finders must have been like in battle conditions and exposed to the elements. The German stereoscopic sight built by Karl Zeiss of Jena was a better instrument - certainly for finding the target in less than ideal conditions - although apparently was hard on the user's eyesight over time and less robust than its opposite number. For testing the ranges the Germans had a superior "ladder" system to the British - indeed the British adopted a variation on this shortly after the battle.

All in all there does not seem to be a huge difference in the sights used by each navy themselves, but as the British version was not as good in difficult conditions - and that is exactly what they faced in this opening part of the battle - the German accuracy was accordingly much better. When you factor in the magazine and cordite handling issues (potentially) then the result is as per below.....

The loss of HMS Indefatigable

Unless otherwise stated the source for these statements comes from Skagerrak.

1548hrs
Lutzow opens fire

1549hrs
The British began to return fire a minute after Lutzow's opening salvo. Staff states that the British ships at first could only fire from their forward guns - further evidence that the deployment and the turn to the eastsoutheast was left far, far too late.

1550hrs
The first in a series of hits is achieved against HMS Tiger by Moltke (although apparently the first hit the German crew records is not until 1606hrs)

1551hrs
Lutzow scores a hit near Lion's bridge with her fourth salvo.
Moltke finds her target once again, although again causes no serious damage to Tiger.

1552hrs
An armour piercing (AP) shell from Lutzow hits the base of Lion's funnel
Strangely, given that Derfflinger was not targeted in the first ten minutes, her shooting was initially disappointing. Only now does she achieve her first straddle against Princess Royal
A third hit for Molke. Fortunately for Tiger, at this stage the hits have not been serious

1553hrs
Moltke again strikes the unfortunate Tiger

1554hrs
A fifth shell from Moltke finds its target. This hits A-turret's barbette, although the turret continues firing. Note: Jellicoe Jutland The Unfinished Battle refers to this hit as being on Q-turret, although he too states that the three turrets A, Q and X were hit around this time.

1555hrs
Queen Mary lands a shell in Seydlitz's starboard switch room and turbo-dynamo room
Tiger receives a sixth hit from the remarkably accurate Moltke - what is particularly remarkable here is that Moltke remember is under fire from two British ships. A seventh shell then strikes Tiger and more serious damage is caused. Q-turret is temporarily put out of action and the turret was to fire only intermittently for the rest of the battle
Beatty now gives the order "Increase the rate of fire"....

1556hrs
Moltke hits Tiger's X-turret putting this out of action - like Q-turret the effect was temporary, but when repaired, the turret subsequently fired 19 degrees off target

1557hrs
Beatty orders a 2-point turn to starboard to increase the range. Apparently at least some of the German ships (Seydlitz amongst them) are able to make use of their secondary armament. There is no mention of the British using theirs at this time. This causes some of the destroyers to fall out of position and, in an attempt to get back into the van, they sail up the engaged side of Beatty's ships further compounded the visibility issues that have hampered the British.
Seydlitz is hit for the second time by Queen Mary - this time the shell penetrated Caesar turret, burning it out completely. The order is given to flood the magazine

1558hrs
It took Lion 9 minutes before she straddled Hipper's flagship, but then scored two hits in quick succession, neither of which caused the much damage
Derfflinger obtains her first hits, striking Princess Royal with AP shells twice. These temporarily put the fire control tower out of action, with one detonating in a coal bunker.
Back to Tiger and a ninth shell strike that could have been fatal. As it was the hit caused the midships 6-inch magazine to be flooded, but it could have been worse as this shell just missed Tiger's main steam pipe - a hit on which would have disabled the ship. It's seems incredible that all during the run to the south and then the run to the north, none of the ships on either side were disabled or sufficiently slowed that they were "gobbled" up by the chasing pack.

1559hrs
Hipper orders a 1-point turn to port thus further increasing the range.

1600hrs
A shell from Lutzow finds Lion's Q turret, a hit that could easily have been the end for HMS Lion and David Beatty. A semi-AP shell struck Lion's Q-turret right between the face plate and the roof. The front of the roof plate was taken clean off. The occupants of the turret were killed as well as most of those in the chamber below. Only the quick thinking of the Royal Marine turret officer Major Francis Harvey saved the ship from a cataclysmic magazine explosion when he ordered the magazine doors closed and flooding of the magazine (see post 112). I think this eyewitness account says much to convey the picture:

....the armoured roof of Q-turret had been folded back like a sardine tin; thick yellow smoke was rolling up in clouds from the gaping hole, and the guns were cocked up in the air awkwardly. All this happened within yards of where Beatty was standing and none of us on the bridge heard the detonation. The destructive power was enormous but, oddly, in the maelstrom of the battle, completely unregistered on the bridge.

Derfflinger scores a hit on Princess Royal's B turret.

1601hrs
According to Staff two further hits were recorded against HMS Lion at this time

1602hrs
After dishing out so much punishment, Moltke is finally hurt - a shell near-missed and the damage caused some flooding forward on her starboard side

1603hrs
Another hit is recorded against Lion
At the rear of the two columns it seems that there is no individual record of the hits inflicted on HMS Indefatigable by Von der Tann. However, the fire ranged against the British battlecruiser was incredibly accurate and indeed was so intense that the Germans had trouble making out the ship at one point due to the maelstrom of smoke, water and battle damage. It was however at this time that the British suffered their first loss of the battle. According to observers, two or three shells hit Indefatigable in or around the rear turret and an explosion was seen (note: it has recently been shown by underwater mapping of the wreck that this was no small explosion (see below)). It was said that Indefatigable was seen to swing out of line - perhaps given the new evidence, this was not a voluntary movement, but was the blast from the hits on the turret that tore the ship in two. She then was seen to roll over as another series of shells hit her forward turret - followed by another huge explosion. Out of a crew of 1,019 just two survived. Von der Tann had not been hit once.

A recent underwater expedition located the wreck of all 25 ships lost at Jutland. The only one whose final resting place was appreciably different to that given in John Harper's (Chief Navigational Officer) charts (more of which anon) was Indefatigable. As a result of the expedition's findings they think they know why. The ships is recorded as being lost when she blew up (as in the picture). The eyewitness accounts assume she was whole at that time. But the stern of the ship was blown clean off some 5-6 minutes earlier, and a shock wave travelled through the remaining section of the ship likely killing almost everyone on board. The shell of the battlecruiser was then carried by her momentum alone before another huge explosion sent her to the bottom.



The loss of HMS Queen Mary and the arrival of the 5th Battle Squadron

The folly of Beatty's deployment had started to become apparent. Whatever the rights and wrongs and who was to blame for the delayed turn of the 5BS, Evan-Thomas had been sailing toward the battle at top speed ever since.

The lead ship, Barham, had been in position to fire, albeit at considerable distance, at the II AG as early as 1558hrs - although to no effect, and the II AG quickly turned away to the northeast under smokescreen. This however was not where their 15-inch shells were needed.

1605hrs
HMS Lion sheers out of line - no doubt while emergency work is carried out to deal with some of the fires and damage. Princess Royal assumes her place in the van.
Tiger is hit forward by a shell from her tormentor Moltke
Von der Tann is said to have been hit twice by Tiger here but no timing given or damage report

1606hrs
Too late by a matter of minutes (as a far as the Indefatigable is concerned) HMS Barham is finally in position to range her guns against Von der Tann. Very soon the whole squadron were able to fire and the lead two battleships - Barham and Valiant - turned their attention on Moltke, while Warspite and Malaya concentrated their efforts on Von der Tann.

1609hrs
Amazingly it is only now that Von der Tann is seriously hit for the first time and she is lucky that damage to her rudder, caused when a shell penetrated her armour aft and exploded sending shock waves through the area, freed itself. 600 tonnes of water enters the battlecruiser. Jellicoe states this took place at 1612hrs and was caused by a shell from the Barham.

1615hrs
Two shells hit the Lutzow in quick succession - both from Princess Royal. One of these lands between A and B turret wiping out the forward dressing station.

1616hrs
Moltke receives a 15-inch shell from Barham that destroys one of the casemated secondary guns and its crew and continues into a coal bunker where it explodes.

1618hrs (1617hrs)
Queen Mary hits the Seydlitz again, this time one of the starboard casemates is penetrated by a shell that kills the crew (less one crewman) of one of the secondary guns.

1620hrs
A shell from Moltke passes through one of Tiger's funnels
The crew of Von der Tann must have felt much as those of Indefatigable felt as she disappears in a hail of water. Her A-turret is hit and put out of action (I thought Germans called their turrets Anton, Bruno, Caesar and Dora but here the turret is called Alsen).

1621hrs
Queen Mary loses one gun in Q-turret courtesy of a shell from Seydlitz. She had previously taken a hit in the aft 4-inch battery, although no time for this is given.

1623hrs
Moltke is hit again, causing some limited flooding
Von der Tann loses another turret - Culm. The battlecruiser is now down to two working turrets - the two amid-ships. Even so she is still capable of causing trouble for the British and she delivers a shell on Barham against her belt armour.

1624hrs
Two further hits are taken by HMS Lion. Staff states that up to this time, nine shells hit HMS Lion since the start of the battle. Of these, no less than four had failed to explode. The British were not alone in having problems with their shells. Jellicoe states three shells are landed at this time - and this number would take Lion up to the nine hits recorded by Tarrant (see below).

1626hrs
At this time both Seydlitz and Derfflinger were targeting Queen Mary. Seven shells in two salvoes were seen to strike the British ship, following which she literally disappeared in a cloud of smoke. There were [20] survivors and [1,266] officers and men were killed. [Amazingly wide variance in the number of casualties]. To convey the scene I will quote from Derfflinger's gunnery officer Hase:

The Queen Mary was firing less rapidly than we were but usually full salvoes. I could see the shells coming and I had to admit that they were shooting superbly. As a rule, all eight shells fell together, but they were almost always over or short....but the poor Queen Mary was having a bad time. In addition to the Derfflinger, she was being engaged by the Seydlitz.... at 4.26 she met her doom...First a vivid red flame shot up from her forepart. Then came an explosion forward, followed by a much heavier explosion amidships. Black debris flew into the air and immediately afterwards the whole ship blew up with a terrific explosion. A gigantic cloud of smoke ros, the masts collapsed inwards, the smoke cloud hid everything and rose higher and higher. Finally nothing but a thick, black cloud of smoke remained where the ship had been. At it's base, the smoke column covered only a small area, but it widened toward the summit like a monstrous pine tree.

Moltke recieves the second of three hits that causes flooding
Von der Tann hits New Zealand, temporarily affecting her B-turret.

1627hrs
Princess Royal is hit near Q-turret (why always Q-turret?) but the turret remains operable.
A third hit on Moltke. The three hits in quick succession allow 1,000 tonnes of water into the ship and she takes on a 3 degree list. Counter-flooding is ordered to right the problem.

1628hrs
Aboard Beatty's flagship, in a frightening spectacle of the fate that would have befallen the battlecruiser had it not been for the quick thinking of Major Harvey, a cordite fire in Lion's Q-turret causes an explosion, and the huge fireball, taking the path of least resistance, flies up into the sky through the open turret roof.

1629hrs
A shell passes through Princess Royal's second funnel but fails to explode

1630hrs
Two shells from Moltke land on Tiger in quick succession. The shells hit the side armour but fail to detonate.

1632hrs
Princess Royal receives a third hit in quick succession - this time A-turret is put out of action for about 11 hours

1635hrs
It's the turn of Seydlitz to hit Tiger, with another hit forward that does little damage
Von der Tann loses her last but one gun when turret Bautzen refuses to operate.

1638hrs Hipper orders a turn to SSE to open the range, before turning toward the British once more three minutes later.

During this period torpedoes were fired, with no effect, by Lion (two) and Moltke (four) and possibly others.


The Invincible and Indefatigable were older ships - amongst the first battlecruisers built. But HMS Queen Mary was only 3-years old and truly a front line vessel. She, like Lutzow for the Germans, was the most important ship lost on her side



Summary of the fighting during the Run to the South

In Jutland The Unfinished Battle Jellicoe quotes from Tarrant's Jutland The German Perspective and states that the hits received were:

British: 44
German: 17

Totalling the hits in Staff's Skagerrak and repeated above (ignoring the near-miss that damaged Moltke and taking Tarrant's 5 hits on Indefatigable) the totals are:

British: 43
German: 18

I will look through the other sources I have to see where the differences lie (if I can) but if not, then the hits produced by each side is not very different when comparing the two sources and gives a clear indication of the superiority held by the Germans at this stage. What we can not know is exactly why that was.

German (as well as British) sources have confirmed that visibility was in the Germans favour at this stage of battle and that the dark grey British ships were easier to see than the German light grey ones.

It also appears that the German range-finding equipment was better - at least in the early stages of a battle, before the greater strain on eyesight caused the German method to lose effectiveness. The Germans also had a better "ladder" method of measuring the fall of shot.

The loss of two battlecruisers can - as much as anything is certain about this battle - be put down to poor magazine and cordite handling.

The recent experiment carried out (mentioned in the book thread) that tested Queen Mary's hull against all the hits Seydlitz received during the entire battle, confirmed that she would not have sunk had it not been for the magazine explosion. Similarly HMS Tiger took 12-14 hits without being sunk. These facts support the naval historian Norman Friedman's assertion that without the magazine and cordite handling issue it is unlikely the British would have lost any battlecruisers at Jutland.

Of course in addition to receiving hits and being able to take them and the ability to land hits on the enemy, there is also the matter of the shells themselves and how effective they are. We will look at this after the battleships clash. At this time we will also look more closely into the faulty magazine and cordite handling process, what exactly that means and whose fault was it that it was in place.


Attachment (3)

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 6/5/2016 7:53:50 AM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 91
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 5/30/2016 5:06:21 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5358
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

he table below gives the maximum range of the various guns fitted to Beatty's and Hipper's ships.


Ship for ship the British had a significant range advantage compared to their German opponents



Interesting. I had not realized that the 13.5-inchers on the "Splendid Cat" class had that much of a range advange over the British 12-inch mounts. Perhaps that was why Beatty waited to open fire -- he wanted all six of his big ships to fire at once?

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 92
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 5/30/2016 5:20:53 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

quote:

he table below gives the maximum range of the various guns fitted to Beatty's and Hipper's ships.


Ship for ship the British had a significant range advantage compared to their German opponents



Interesting. I had not realized that the 13.5-inchers on the "Splendid Cat" class had that much of a range advange over the British 12-inch mounts. Perhaps that was why Beatty waited to open fire -- he wanted all six of his big ships to fire at once?
warspite1

I think that it would have been mentioned afterwards if it was a deliberate tactic. But in any case there does not seem to be any reason for adopting that approach though. Added to the fact that it would give Beatty no advantage, it would also mean waiting even longer to open fire as Indefatigable and New Zealand (the two with the shortest range) were bringing up the rear. I will mention these two, and how long it took them to fire, in post 91.


< Message edited by warspite1 -- 5/31/2016 6:21:34 AM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 93
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 5/31/2016 7:43:42 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
The Battle of Jutland/Skagerrak

100 Years Ago today.

In memory of ALL those who fought and died in the service of their country.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 94
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 5/31/2016 9:12:35 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
The BBC has a story about the battle and memorial service, including the unfortunate phrase "The German fleet are deflected from bombarding the British coast by Admiral Beatty's battle cruiser squadron during the battle".

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-36390168

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 95
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 5/31/2016 9:14:58 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Draft incomplete - a lot more work required here

The first of the destroyer engagements, Hipper turns away and the torpedoeing of the Lutzow

Jutland was not just about the 'big ships'. Whilst the battlecruisers were engaged during the 'Run to the South', the first of the destroyer melee's began to develop.

Beatty had originally ordered his destroyers to prepare for an attack as early as 1555hrs - only seven minutes into the battle. Apparently a minute later he ordered the destroyers "to proceed with all speed". However, having seen no evidence of a reaction, he then signalled to the Flotilla Leader HMS Champion at 1609hrs to attack with torpedoes. By this time Indefatigable had just been lost, although Beatty may have been unaware of this.

However, the seeming lack of action was a function of how difficult it was for the destroyers to get into position, whilst not getting in each others way - or indeed that of the battlecruisers. For one thing, the British destroyers were divided with the 13th Flotilla, on Beatty’s starboard side, and the 9th/10th Flotillas + HMS Obdurate from the 13th on the BCF commander’s port (engaged) side.

Note: because of the confused state of the fighting the events described under each time, should not be taken necessarily as happening there and then. The timings indicate the commencement of various actions which then take place over a period of time.

1615hrs
The 13th Flotilla receives orders from their Flotilla Leader (HMS Champion) to attack. Note: finding reliable detail on this episode is proving difficult – Skagerrak and The Unfinished Battle state different ships being involved, although both state 12 destroyers.

But it appears that Captain Barrie Bingham (see post 112), aboard HMS Nestor, leads the following destroyers (a mix of 10th and 13th Flotillas) into action: Nicator, Petard, Nerissa, Nomad, Turbulent, Termagent, Moorsom, Obdurate, Morris, Narborough and Pelican. Note: Moresby and Onslow were not involved initially as they had provided the escort for Engadine.

As can be imagined the attack was difficult to co-ordinate with ships either side of the battlecruisers, the poor visability and the fact that the destroyers themselves were under fire from shorts and overs aimed at the battlecruisers and the secondary armament being fired at them directly.

According to Staff, Champion did not escort its flotilla in but HMS Nottingham, of the 2LCS, was ordered by Goodenough to assist. Unfortunately in so doing she got in the way of some of the destroyers and caused them to have to take urgent avoiding action.

1626hrs
Much – in fact a great deal - will be made of the fact that Admiral Jellicoe turned away from a German Torpedo attack later in the battle. However, this was a sensible and widely adopted practice…as we shall see.

On seeing the British destroyers heading into the ‘no-man’s land’ between the battlecruiser lines, Hipper gave the order to turn away, first to the southeast and then to eastsoutheast. This order is not criticised and is not given anything more than a brief mention in most books on the subject. Only at 1641hrs did Hipper give the order to turn southwest once more.

But what of the British attack? The attack, which as said above, was somewhat piecemeal, broke up further as the Germans responded to the British move. Kommodore Heinrich, aboard the light cruiser Regensburg, ordered the eleven torpedo boats (TB) of the 9th Flotilla into action. Four ships of the 3rd Half-Flotilla also joined. What then ensued was essentially a destroyer vs TB battle (with support from the cruisers Regensburg (close support) and Nottingham (firing from ‘distance’)) with a few of the British destroyers deciding to ignore the TB’s and continue on with their original orders; attacking Hipper’s battlecruisers.

I have gathered the following from Skagerrak, although the German sources appear exaggerated (15-20 destroyers and 3 light cruisers):

Obdurate – hit twice
Nomad – hit once, a shell in the engine room brings her to a stop
V.27 – hit twice, including a shell rupturing the main steam pipe bringing her to a stop
V.29 – torpedoed by HMS Petard
S.36 – Splinter damage

From The Unfinished Battle the following can be ascertained:

1640hrs
Three British destroyers Nomad (Bingham), Nestor and Nicator ignore the TB’s and continue with their mission

1645hrs
The three small ships are targeted by heavy German secondary fire and from a light cruiser (possibly Wiesbaden). Nomad is badly hit and wheels away before coming to a dead stop and sinking. She avoids two torpedoes (that travel under her) and from her dead-duck position, manages to fire off three torpedoes. Nicator and Nestor also fire off two torpedoes each but none of these register a hit.

1650hrs
Petard torpedoes the Seydlitz

1700hrs
Nestor is hit twice (by whom it is not know) – like Nomad she too comes to a stop and both will soon sink after being plastered by gun-fire from German ships as the ‘Run to the North’ gets going.

In total the twelve British destroyers fired off twenty-one torpedoes, hitting the Seydlitz and sinking V.29.
The German TB’s launched eighteen torpedoes and while none of these hit, their presence did cause the 5BS to turn away by 2 points at one point in the battle.











< Message edited by warspite1 -- 6/19/2016 9:48:37 AM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 96
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 5/31/2016 9:25:18 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
The Independent has the same picture and untrue caption.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/jutland-battle-of-jutland-centenary-100th-anniversary-ww1-1916-navy-germany-britain-who-won-what-a7057336.html

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 97
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 5/31/2016 9:28:43 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
My goodness - that's even worse!!! Apparently Beatty formed a protective screen....right......

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 98
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 5/31/2016 9:33:31 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
My faith in British media is shattered. The Guardian has better coverage.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/31/battle-of-jutland-centenary-commemorated-in-orkney and

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/31/battle-of-jutland-centenary-marked-with-service-in-orkney-islands and

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/30/battle-jutland-descendants-david-cameron-centenary-service and

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/may/29/the-battle-of-jutland-the-chilcot-shambles-of-its-day

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 99
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 5/31/2016 9:39:31 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
I've just read a few paragraphs of Michael White's article. Awful, just awful. Apparently in 1914 German U-boats sank allied shipping on a "prodigious scale" and the Imperial High Seas Fleet was commanded by Reinhard Scheer..... As for the battle, in the preliminary skirmishes all 25 ships were sunk....

Oh...

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 100
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 5/31/2016 9:41:21 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
Meanwhile over here...the Washington Post and NY Times only coverage of the Jutland anniversary is to say that Prince Philip won't be attending the ceremonies.

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 101
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 5/31/2016 9:42:19 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
I'm glad they too are concentrating on the important points....

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 102
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/2/2016 2:35:12 AM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5358
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I've just read a few paragraphs of Michael White's article. Awful, just awful. Apparently in 1914 German U-boats sank allied shipping on a "prodigious scale" and the Imperial High Seas Fleet was commanded by Reinhard Scheer..... As for the battle, in the preliminary skirmishes all 25 ships were sunk....

Oh...


Yes, White got a lot of his history wrong. I am curious about one point, though: were the British shells inferior? It seems to me I've heard somewhaere else that they tended to detonate on impact, instead of with a slight delay to allow them to penetrate.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 103
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/2/2016 5:15:51 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I've just read a few paragraphs of Michael White's article. Awful, just awful. Apparently in 1914 German U-boats sank allied shipping on a "prodigious scale" and the Imperial High Seas Fleet was commanded by Reinhard Scheer..... As for the battle, in the preliminary skirmishes all 25 ships were sunk....

Oh...


Yes, White got a lot of his history wrong. I am curious about one point, though: were the British shells inferior? It seems to me I've heard somewhaere else that they tended to detonate on impact, instead of with a slight delay to allow them to penetrate.
warspite1

I haven't read too much on that so far. Jellicoe mentions it and so does Gordon. What does seem to be the consensus is that yes, the British shells tended to explode on impact rather than travel through and then detonate. Gordon states that the problem was not of "scandal" proportions but clearly didn't help. That said, German shells were not always reliable either with (I don't know the %) failing to explode e.g. the first hit of the battle, on Galatea, never exploded, and as we've seen above, at least 4 of 9 shells that hit Lion failed to detonate.


< Message edited by warspite1 -- 6/5/2016 8:23:53 AM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 104
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/2/2016 5:40:06 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
One thing I do recall from the various books is that Jellicoe detractors use this shell issue to savage him because he was in the post for a time that was responsible for ordnance, while the pro-Jellicoe faction state that he was trying to do something about it when he was moved on - and his successor was the duffer and did not pursue the issue with the same degree of zeal.

I hope Norman Friedman goes into this in more detail in Fighting the Great War at Sea.

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 6/2/2016 7:17:51 AM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 105
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/2/2016 8:34:08 PM   
Zorch

 

Posts: 7087
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
"WATCH A 100-YEAR-OLD NAVAL BATTLE IN ANIMATION"

http://www.popsci.com/watch-100-year-old-naval-battle-animated






Attachment (1)

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 106
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/2/2016 10:26:12 PM   
catwhoorg


Posts: 686
Joined: 9/27/2012
From: Uk expat lving near Atlanta
Status: offline
I understand it is elated to the stability of the HE used.

The Royal Navy was still using older shells with an explosive much more vulnerable to impact detonation.

It could easy be an excuse though, and time will have diminished the ability to dig down and get the truth.

(in reply to Zorch)
Post #: 107
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/3/2016 5:28:18 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Draft Incomplete

The Run to the North

For this part of the discussion I shall lean heavily on Andrew Gordon's Rules of the Game.

We've left the action with Hipper and Beatty locked in a running duel while all the time heading inexorably south - straight into the arms of Admiral Scheer, hurriedly steaming north. If all goes to plan, this will allow the German admiral to bag the remaining ships of Beatty's BCF. However, as we know, Beatty is playing his own game of cat and mouse.....

We shall however, briefly leave the duelling battlecruisers and turn our attention to the southeast. Following the sighting of the enemy by Galatea, all three British LCS's headed east to assist Galatea. However Commodore Goodenough, in his flagship Southampton, was the furthest west of the three squadrons and had not had an opportunity to assist before Beatty made the turn to SSE - and Goodenough went with him and then used his ships speed to race ahead of Beatty's ship so as to be able to provide a scouting and screening role for the BCF. It appears that it was Goodenough's decision as to whether he would either take on the former role or support the destroyers and fellow cruiser squadrons in their attacks.

HMS Southampton. The flagship of Commodore William Goodenough and his 2nd Light Cruiser Squadron. Goodenough has had a largely excellent press in accounts of the battle, thanks to his diligent and frequent reporting of events. Ignoring failings closer to home, Beatty, unfairly, tried to get Goodenough sacked after the Scarborough raid but wiser heads prevailed and this experienced officer remained in situ for Jutland




Enter Admiral Scheer and the Hochseesflotte

At this time - 1630hrs - four battlecruisers with varying degrees of damage, and four largely untouched battleships, are heading straight for Scheer's battleships which number 16 dreadnoughts and 6 pre-dreadnoughts. Light cruisers are roughly even but the Germans have considerably more destroyers. The testimony from German sailors aboard the battlecruisers, buoyed no doubt by their early success, talk of confidence and morale being high, as Scheer comes into view. This is the opportunity that Scheer had been waiting for. Little does he realise that the "cat" is, in a short space of time, about to become the "mouse".....

There is perhaps also another point worthy of consideration here. For reasons that we have seen - and will see additional examples of in posts to come - the British get most of the brickbats here. But what of Scheer and Hipper? The purpose of this German operation was to trap and destroy a portion of the British force. But there appears to be little commentary on the plan put into operation and the communications between Scheer and his subordinate.

Hipper had done a great job in luring Beatty south and, as a bonus, destroying Indefatigable and Queen Mary. But surely, all that would be achieved if the fleets remained on their present course, was for Beatty to simply turn around when he was informed by his cruiser screen, that he had the whole German fleet heading towards him. At that point Beatty would turn east and head for home as quickly as possible.

So why did Hipper (and Scheer) not use some imagination and try and trap the British ships? Surely had Hipper sailed in an ESE direction, Beatty would have followed. The advantage of course for the Germans is that Beatty could quickly find himself caught between Hipper and the rapidly advancing Scheer and not free to simply run off. It seems strange that the Germans have not (from the accounts I've read) been picked up on this.... Well in the absence of any comment to the contrary as to why such a move was impossible (or at least difficult) I think this reflects poorly on the German tactical nous.

Gary Staff's Skagerrak is particularly disappointing in this regard as it is supposed to view the battle from the German side. At least Andrew Gordon makes mention of if - albeit briefly - and to no real purpose. In Rules of the Game he states that:

....At first the plan was to get to the west of Beatty's expected line of advance, to block his retreat; but excitement became tinged with alarm when the British 2nd Battle Squadron (the 5th really) was reported as joining in, and the commander-in-chief turned his cumbersome fleet onto a direct course towards Hipper, informing his junior of his position, course and speed.....


Sadly this does not really answer the question....but anyway, back to the next British hiccup.....


5. The order to 5BS to turn north

The next talking point once again involves Beatty, the 5th Battle Squadron and signals..... haven't we been here before?

At around the time that Queen Mary blew up, her magnificent structure replaced by nothing more a massive cloud of smoke, Goodenough and the 2LCS were about two miles ahead of the now, significantly diminished, BCF, with two cruisers on each flank of Beatty’s flagship. Goodenough sent the following W/T signal to Jellicoe and Beatty at 16:30:

“Enemy cruiser bearing SE steering NE (together with the 2LCS position)”.

The cruiser was Rostock, and it was not long before the unmistakeable sight of Scheer’s HSF came into view. At 16:37 Goodenough sent another signal – again followed by his own position:

“Urgent priority. Have sighted enemy battlefleet bearing approximately SE. Course of enemy N”

The bridge of HMS Lion must have been a picture at the moment the message was received. What was Beatty (and his fellow officers) truly thinking? Well whatever thoughts Beatty had, there was only one thing to be done. Having finally, for the first time, actually sited the HSF, he now had to make damn sure he could lure it onto the guns of Jellicoe’s Grand Fleet.

At 16:40 the signal was raised from Lion’s mast – and then hauled down, thus making the order executive:

“Alter course in succession, 16 points to starboard”

Lion swung around, followed one at a time by Princess Royal, Tiger and New Zealand, so that they came out of the turn in the same position.

The range between the BCF and Scheer’s 3rd Squadron was about 20,000 yards at that time. The German ships opened up against the BCF but the range meant that Beatty’s ships were largely untroubled by the German salvoes and Beatty could concentrate on Hipper's battlecruisers once more.

After Beatty turned, Goodenough and the 2nd LCS remained in situ, acting as reconnaissance for the fleet. Goodenough’s executive officer reminded his commander that if he did not make his next signal shortly, he may well never send another! At 16:48 Goodenough sent a further signal to the fleet:

“Urgent. Priority. Course of enemy’s battlefleet in single line ahead. Composition of van Kaiser class. Bearing of centre E. Destroyers on both wings and ahead. Enemy battlecruisers joining battlefleet from northward (together with the 2LCS position)”.

However, despite the XO’s understandable prompting, all this time the 2LCS remained free from attack as Scheer was uncertain whether the cruisers (head-on to Scheer’s ships) were friend or foe. Only when the four cruisers turned away did their silhouette make it clear to the Germans that they were of the latter type – and the German guns then responded accordingly.

At this point we switch back to the 5BS, which was still 8 miles astern of the BCF at the time Beatty made his turn, and were heavily engaged with the German battlecruisers. I won’t go into too much detail here on the initial orders given to the 5BS to turn north – because the case Gordon makes is convincing in suggesting there wasn’t any. In some other works (Marder and Harper for example) it is suggested that Beatty’s order to turn 16 points to starboard was meant for the 5BS as well – and Marder uses this to further condemn Seymour.

However, Gordon makes three points as to why this is unfair on Seymour and that Beatty had no reason to extend this order to the 5BS:
1. Remember that the 5BS was north of the BCF and only in contact with Hipper. Why would Beatty want to keep the 5BS that distance away and leave his own battlecruisers to take on both Hipper and Scheer.
2. At 8 miles apart, any signal by flags would have to be backed up with searchlight - but this was not done. Gordon states that "even Beatty's hapless flag-lieutenant could not have expected Barham to read a flag signal from that distance.
3. Beatty was shortly to make another alteration to course which would not have been necessary if the 5BS was subject to the earlier order.

However, the story of the turn to the north does not end there....

So, with the BCF having completed their volte-face, the situation was that the BCF and 5BS were separated by about 7 miles and heading straight for one another. Beatty ordered a 4-point adjustment. The effect of this is that the two fleets would pass each other with the 5BS on the BCF’s disengaged side. A few minutes later Evan-Thomas ordered a small alteration of course for the 5BS too. It is not known what prompted this but likely to have been either in response to Beatty's move, or perhaps to avoid a torpedo scare.

What was the motivation for Beatty wanting the 5BS to pass on his (Beatty's) disengaged side? Gordon suggests this may have been a product of his personal, fighting, warrior-like qualities. Possibly. Or maybe - and I may be being harsh here - he just didn't give it enough thought and charged into a decision without thinking.... either way Gordon believes his decision making was faulty for more practical reasons:

- By passing on the engaged side i.e. coming between the 5BS and Hipper, Beatty was asking for more gunfire to be rained down on his already depleted and damaged fleet
- It would have allowed Beatty some respite to enable him to concentrate for a while on the 3C's - Command, Control and Communication
- It would have enabled Beatty to continue in the direction he wanted to go without de-tour (see below)
- It would have avoided a manoeuvring problem for the 5BS that was about to take shape.

As said above, in order for Beatty to continue on his previous NW course, he made a turn to port which would take the BCF across the rear of the 5BS and he would now need to order Evan-Thomas to "alter course in succession 16 points to starboard" (i.e. turning away from the on-coming HSF and then coming out of the turn behind HMS New Zealand). Provided this message was delivered, received and acted upon at the right time, then there would be little to no problem..... but Jutland wasn't like that.

The 'accepted' version of events (which just happens to stem from the time that Beatty was 1st Sea Lord) appears to be that the signal to turn 16 points to starboard was hoisted when the ships were still minutes apart and that the signal was hauled down (remember this is what makes a signal executive) at 16:48. Evan Thomas aboard Barham is then supposed to have ignored this signal for 9 minutes before turning at 16:57.

Gordon argues that this would have been impossible as that would mean (given the speed of travel of both the south bound British ships and the north bound German ships, that the 5BS would be only about 12,000 from the HSF when they started to turn!

Why is this subject important? Well not least because the timing of the signal given to the southbound 5BS was vital in ensuring that a) they were able to take up station where required, in support of the BCF, and b) because if the call was made too late, the 5BS was going to face the fury of the German battlefleet....

Without going into minute detail on this, what is interesting is that while Gordon does not seek to absolve Beatty and Seymour of any blame for the almost certain bungling of the signals (although he does make the point that this was a very 'busy' time in the battle for Seymour) he once again - as per the earlier problem with 5BS at the commencement of the battle - chooses to blame Evan-Thomas for being too inflexible in having to follow orders to the letter and not taking action on his own initiative.


The caption states taken from HMS Barham 1916. With Queen Elizabeth in the dockyard it fell to her sisters to form the 5BS. They sailed and fought in the order Barham (Flagship) Valiant, Warspite and Malaya. Their arrival in the nick of time almost certainly saved the survivors of Beatty's two battlecruiser squadrons, but their absence at the start of the battle almost certainly saved Hipper






Attachment (2)

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 2/5/2017 6:04:17 AM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to catwhoorg)
Post #: 108
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/3/2016 5:53:02 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Haven't had time to watch it yet so it's still on my sky box! Any good?
warspite1

Its worth a watch certainly - if only to finally find out what happened to the tragic HMS Indefatigable.

But as with many such programs, it couldn't quite deliver what it promised. If you knew nothing about the battle, I suspect you would come away totally and utterly confused because they made a big thing about finding Harper's original maps - and that the underwater survey proved the maps were accurate.... but gave no clue whatsoever as to what the hell all that actually meant.



Just watched this. Enjoyed it overall. Interesting to see some of the footage and stills that exist again and as you say good to get clarity on Indefatigable and also just to get that further clarity in general. Obviously didn't cover a lot of stuff and the only part that bugged me were the silly voiceovers of people reading the eyewitness accounts.

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 109
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/3/2016 5:57:16 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Haven't had time to watch it yet so it's still on my sky box! Any good?
warspite1

Its worth a watch certainly - if only to finally find out what happened to the tragic HMS Indefatigable.

But as with many such programs, it couldn't quite deliver what it promised. If you knew nothing about the battle, I suspect you would come away totally and utterly confused because they made a big thing about finding Harper's original maps - and that the underwater survey proved the maps were accurate.... but gave no clue whatsoever as to what the hell all that actually meant.



Just watched this. Enjoyed it overall. Interesting to see some of the footage and stills that exist again and as you say good to get clarity on Indefatigable and also just to get that further clarity in general. Obviously didn't cover a lot of stuff and the only part that bugged me were the silly voiceovers of people reading the eyewitness accounts.
warspite1

The BBC one documentary is superior


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 110
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/3/2016 6:10:35 PM   
Speedysteve

 

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline
Ok cool. Aim to watch that shortly

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 111
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/4/2016 12:20:56 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Draft incomplete

Scheer announces his arrival on the battlefield

For this part of the battle I shall call upon Staff's Skaggerak.

At 16:30hrs the Konig, at the head of the 3rd Battle Squadron, sighted duelling ships to the NNW; German ships to starboard and British ships to port, while inbetween there were destroyers and cruisers attacking each other.

At 16:38hrs Scheer ordered an increase to 17 knots.

At 16:46hrs the order was given to open fire. The position of the various squadrons at this time was:

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 2/5/2017 6:20:57 AM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Speedysteve)
Post #: 112
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/4/2016 8:32:49 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Draft Incomplete

Enter Jellicoe

6. Reporting and the passing of information between Beatty, Jellicoe and the various squadrons

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 6/4/2016 8:35:53 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 113
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/4/2016 8:34:47 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Draft Incomplete

7. Jellicoe's deployment

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 6/4/2016 8:48:29 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 114
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/4/2016 10:03:50 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Draft Incomplete

Scheer gets his T-crossed


The Germans escape the trap - Part I

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 115
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/4/2016 10:05:00 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Draft Incomplete

8. British shells and faulty magazine and cordite handlng procedure

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 6/4/2016 10:07:08 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 116
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/4/2016 10:07:29 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Draft Incomplete

9. Scheer gets himself ensnared once again. Just what was he really thinking?

Scheer escapes Part II

10. The Grand Fleet turn away. Wise manoeuvre or the action of a timid man?

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 6/4/2016 10:23:44 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 117
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/11/2016 1:26:56 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Before I continue with Post 108 has anyone read any commentary about the "plan" for Hipper and Scheer to destroy a British Squadron? Whilst the British signals, communications and thoughts have been long analysed, I cannot see that the same can be said of the Germans at this stage of the battle. It strikes me that not much thinking went into the basic plan in terms of actually trying to trap the British ships. This was obviously of some importance given that the British ships could out-run the HSF.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 118
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/11/2016 1:48:36 PM   
Orm


Posts: 22154
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline
I know it is out of place but I just want to say that I had no idea (until I saw a documentary) that there are several, or even lots, of sailors buried in Sweden after the battle of Jutland.

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 119
RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on - 6/11/2016 1:52:26 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Yes, in one of the books I read recently - I think it was the Jellicoe one - they mention this. There was an author lost with the Wiesbaden and his body was washed ashore in Sweden.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: A look at The Battle of Jutland 100 years on Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.814