Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: margeorg

The Admiral Hipper class (to which the prinz Eugen belongs) actually was not a good design. First of all, it missed the Washington treaty limits significantly. Second, it´s engine design was highly complicated, causing many troubles during missions. it was also plagued by small endurance. The AA armament was too slow to react to modern planes, and their fire guidance systems caused high topweights and were very sensible for vibrations causing them to fail.

Overall, the Hipper class was average at best.

BTW, the Prinz Eugen didn´t sink the Hood. One of their hits caused a fire among Hood´s 10,2cm AA ammo, but this fire was not responsible for the explosion that sunk the Hood. PEs 20,3cm guns had no chance to penetrate the main armor of Hood. It must have been one of the 38,1cm shells from Bismarck.

I would say the Zara´s are worthy candidates, but my no. 1 favorite is the French "Algerie". Well-armored, good endurance and speed, and still within the treaty limits.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank

Those Deutschland-Class CAs weren´t too bad either. Surely a match for every CA around at that times.

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

quote:

ORIGINAL: margeorg

The Admiral Hipper class (to which the prinz Eugen belongs) actually was not a good design. First of all, it missed the Washington treaty limits significantly. Second, it´s engine design was highly complicated, causing many troubles during missions. it was also plagued by small endurance. The AA armament was too slow to react to modern planes, and their fire guidance systems caused high topweights and were very sensible for vibrations causing them to fail.

Overall, the Hipper class was average at best.

BTW, the Prinz Eugen didn´t sink the Hood. One of their hits caused a fire among Hood´s 10,2cm AA ammo, but this fire was not responsible for the explosion that sunk the Hood. PEs 20,3cm guns had no chance to penetrate the main armor of Hood. It must have been one of the 38,1cm shells from Bismarck.

I would say the Zara´s are worthy candidates, but my no. 1 favorite is the French "Algerie". Well-armored, good endurance and speed, and still within the treaty limits.

That's interesting because I had heard that they fired short against Swordfishes because they were too damn slow (the Sfs). Also, I had heard that Hood was transporting a load of rockets on the upper deck (I would have heaved them over the side before battle), and that that might possibly have caused the magazine blasts. I've never heard, but I wonder what percentage of magazine blasts set off other magazines. There had to be more than one to blow her to pieces like that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank

Those Deutschland-Class CAs weren´t too bad either. Surely a match for every CA around at that times.

quote:

ORIGINAL: margeorg
Well,

they weren´t CAs at all, at least not by the Washington treaty regulations. Frankly spoken they were CA-like ships with oversized main armament, and undersized armour and secondary armament. Their Diesel motors were ideal to act as raiders against shipping lines, but their fragile design and low armour made them highly vulnerable even against treaty CAs. Well suited as raiders, but that was all ...

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

quote:

ORIGINAL: margeorg

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank

Those Deutschland-Class CAs weren´t too bad either. Surely a match for every CA around at that times.

Well,

they weren´t CAs at all, at least not by the Washington treaty regulations. Frankly spoken they were CA-like ships with oversized main armament, and undersized armour and secondary armament. Their Diesel motors were ideal to act as raiders against shipping lines, but their fragile design and low armour made them highly vulnerable even against treaty CAs. Well suited as raiders, but that was all ...

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson
At the Battle of the River Plate it could be argued that exceptional maneuvering by the two British cruisers were a significant factor, but two British treaty cruisers did enough damage to the Graf Spee to force her into a neutral port and ultimately she was scuttled.

Bill

quote:

ORIGINAL: btbw

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson
At the Battle of the River Plate it could be argued that exceptional maneuvering by the two British cruisers were a significant factor, but two British treaty cruisers did enough damage to the Graf Spee to force her into a neutral port and ultimately she was scuttled.

Bill

Fate of raider. ANY damage decrease ability of raider to continue battle.
And ship sunk only when crew do that. No critical or vital damage taken.
Cautious guidance also is mistake like many other mistakes did by german admirals.

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: btbw

No facts as always. Dude you definitely get my green button.

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

quote:

Like I said on the other thread about Guadalcanal, you really need to read a book or two.

quote:

Fact 1

It was Langsdorff's decision to disobey orders and engage the British cruisers.

quote:

Fact 2

Had he taken the cautious route - and indeed obeyed orders - he would probably not have lost his ship.

quote:

Fact 3

No critical or vital damage taken? So why did she put into port? She had seen off the 8-inch gunned Exeter, and now faced two light cruisers whose main armament was equal to Graf Spee's secondary weaponry.

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

quote:

ORIGINAL: margeorg

The Admiral Hipper class (to which the prinz Eugen belongs) actually was not a good design. First of all, it missed the Washington treaty limits significantly. Second, it´s engine design was highly complicated, causing many troubles during missions. it was also plagued by small endurance. The AA armament was too slow to react to modern planes, and their fire guidance systems caused high topweights and were very sensible for vibrations causing them to fail.

Overall, the Hipper class was average at best.

BTW, the Prinz Eugen didn´t sink the Hood. One of their hits caused a fire among Hood´s 10,2cm AA ammo, but this fire was not responsible for the explosion that sunk the Hood. PEs 20,3cm guns had no chance to penetrate the main armor of Hood. It must have been one of the 38,1cm shells from Bismarck.

I would say the Zara´s are worthy candidates, but my no. 1 favorite is the French "Algerie". Well-armored, good endurance and speed, and still within the treaty limits.

That's interesting because I had heard that they fired short against Swordfishes because they were too damn slow (the Sfs). Also, I had heard that Hood was transporting a load of rockets on the upper deck (I would have heaved them over the side before battle), and that that might possibly have caused the magazine blasts. I've never heard, but I wonder what percentage of magazine blasts set off other magazines. There had to be more than one to blow her to pieces like that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

quote:

ORIGINAL: margeorg

The Admiral Hipper class (to which the prinz Eugen belongs) actually was not a good design. First of all, it missed the Washington treaty limits significantly. Second, it´s engine design was highly complicated, causing many troubles during missions. it was also plagued by small endurance. The AA armament was too slow to react to modern planes, and their fire guidance systems caused high topweights and were very sensible for vibrations causing them to fail.

Overall, the Hipper class was average at best.

BTW, the Prinz Eugen didn´t sink the Hood. One of their hits caused a fire among Hood´s 10,2cm AA ammo, but this fire was not responsible for the explosion that sunk the Hood. PEs 20,3cm guns had no chance to penetrate the main armor of Hood. It must have been one of the 38,1cm shells from Bismarck.

I would say the Zara´s are worthy candidates, but my no. 1 favorite is the French "Algerie". Well-armored, good endurance and speed, and still within the treaty limits.

That's interesting because I had heard that they fired short against Swordfishes because they were too damn slow (the Sfs). Also, I had heard that Hood was transporting a load of rockets on the upper deck (I would have heaved them over the side before battle), and that that might possibly have caused the magazine blasts. I've never heard, but I wonder what percentage of magazine blasts set off other magazines. There had to be more than one to blow her to pieces like that.

rockets on the Hood?

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Heck...Graf Spee put up a pretty good fight against three cruisers. A bit more luck would have easily turned that fight into a German victory.

quote:

ORIGINAL: btbw

I see many reading dude still write here?
Well since it battle of facts i toss mine.

quote:

Like I said on the other thread about Guadalcanal, you really need to read a book or two.

Dont repeat your magic words always. It work when you know more then others. But you dont.

quote:

Fact 1

It was Langsdorff's decision to disobey orders and engage the British cruisers.

Graf Spee dont have a chance to run from brit cruisers. In a DAY TIME. Best solution was engage them and kill (or heavy damaged) them one by one.
But maneuring and ESPECIALLY firing was incompetent (also from changes taken by brave Langsdorff which got wounded when stay on open bridge during battle and forerver lost any wish to fight).
During engagement (best tactic for slow but better armed and armored ship) 1/4 of brit force was lost.
If Langsdorff continue engagement and dont try hide in neutral port (with brit ships inside wich automatically make that port as trap) then brits will lost another ship or two or night time broke contact. But german admirals never had will for fight.

quote:

Fact 2

Had he taken the cautious route - and indeed obeyed orders - he would probably not have lost his ship.

Slow ship cannot run from 4 faster cruisers. In day time. Contact established at 6am. So all day ship can only run with danger lost all ammo durig counterattack incoming cruisers attacks with low probability to hit on high distances and in arc which decided by enemies.
Only solution was aggressive action in gap between effective range of 283mm and 150mm. When ship do that Exceter was taken out. When Langsdorff start chaotic evadings (from torpedoes... well commander of torpedo boats see always torpedoes) and redirect fire from one ship to another - battle come to bad part for german ship.

quote:

Fact 3

No critical or vital damage taken? So why did she put into port? She had seen off the 8-inch gunned Exeter, and now faced two light cruisers whose main armament was equal to Graf Spee's secondary weaponry.

Solution which taken by Langsdorff based on 2 things which usual for German (and also Italian) fleet.
It danger of lost very needed for country ship and execution after it from nazi leader.
So Langsdorff decide bring ship in neutral port and toss off her fate to political relations between countries and law.
But if we come back to ship we will found FACTS: ship dont take ANY critical damage which can decrease ability for run in nighttime from brits or destroy any of their ships during random night action.
Ship dont lost speed, dont have floation, still had ammo (30% for main and 50% for secondaries), dont have heavy losses in crew. Enemy dont have will for continue fight and start retreat. But incompetent captain choose baddiest port for avoid possible night (torpedoes again) action and hide in Montevideo. Even after taking look on ship and understanding real situation this commander never had will to fight but trust to brits false about BC around La Platte. His set of choices which he sent to KM was surrender or sunk. It describe how low morale had commander. And his suicide only final of that.
But again WHERE IS SHIP DAMAGE which make that ship bad? Bad morale and experience of captain - yes. Ship is fine.
Green button again for many reading dude.

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: margeorg

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank

Those Deutschland-Class CAs weren´t too bad either. Surely a match for every CA around at that times.

Well,

they weren´t CAs at all, at least not by the Washington treaty regulations. Frankly spoken they were CA-like ships with oversized main armament, and undersized armour and secondary armament. Their Diesel motors were ideal to act as raiders against shipping lines, but their fragile design and low armour made them highly vulnerable even against treaty CAs. Well suited as raiders, but that was all ...

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

And as for your comment about the British not having the will to fight. That just confirms your troll status.