Turning point of the War.

[Die Hard]

With the addition of the Kriegsmarine ships that were damaged during the campaign, it only left the Kriegsmarine was a surface force of single heavy cruiser, two light cruisers and four destroyers operational.  As I stated in my previous post, this left the Kriegsmarine very weakened and incapable of properly supporting Operation Sea Lion. 


ack-ack

Operation Seelöve was postponed/canceled on 17 September 1940 after losing the Battle of Britain.

Available warships:
1 Battleship - Bismarck (operational August 1940).
3 Heavy cruisers - Prinz Eugen (operational August 1940), Admiral Scheer, Lützow.
4 light cruisers - Emden, Köln, Leipzig, Nürnberg.
2 WWI battleships - Schleswig-Holstein, Schlesien.
10-15 destroyers (four of which were survivors of the Norwegian campaign).

[Angus]

I rephrase the issue of not counting (unhatched) eggs in a cockfight. Bismarck and Tirpitz were not ready ships at the operations in Norway. The only two "Modern" Battleships Germany had on the seas were the Scarnhorst and Gneisenau, actually listed as Battlecruisers. They prompted 11 inch guns instead of the 14-16 of the Battleships.
(I actually think the 11 inch caliber was quite a good weapon, but that's another issue)

There is quite a difference between launched and commisioned, not to mention being a part of an operation or not. Bismarck and Tirpitz were not ready at the Norwegian ops, nor planned for so, nor used at all. The Kriegsmarine had 2 Battlecruisers of more modern design in the ops and that was it.

BTW the date I have for Bismarck commisioned is 24 of August. That is more than 2 months after the complete capitulation of Norway. At least no misinterpration there. More than 3 months from the main operation though.

But, a misconception though...? From you:
"14 destroyers took part in the operation."
"Germany started the operation with four modern battleships, two WWI battleships, six heavy cruisers, six light cruisers and 30-odd destroyers."
Easy to misunderstand this. So, of 14 cruisers used they lost 10. There is then no myth about the German Zerstörer force coming back totally crippled from the engagements.

As for the age of the ships by the way, the German Destroyers were relaitively new ships. They were bigger than the standard UK destroyers and thereby sported more armour and firepower. Actually the bigger ones had about the same caliber as light cruisers.

Now for that one:
"The Allied navies also suffered heavier losses."
I asked first. I pretty much had the idea that the tonnege would fall unfavourable to the allies due to the aircraft carrier, which is like 10 destroyers in tonneage. But the slice of the pie falls like a doom hammer on the KM in relation. The whole play was about getting away with a cunning plan without risking a major naval engagement. They struck luck when sinking HMS Glorious, although the shooting gallery ending with a semi-phyrric victory (Both Battleships RTB due to damage). And they struck bad luck when Warspite busted them in bed. Takes some brass to put a slow WW1 Battlewagon into a fjord anyway, - the nightmare of engaging destroyers. So they were in bed probably. BTW, the Germans had arty on land already which got some shelling from Warspite.

Good to have the order of battle though. No misreading. Looks a tad different from the "operation" initially mentioned, which I am curious of what could be.

Good night to all

[Angus]

Operation Seelöve was postponed/canceled on 17 September 1940 after losing the Battle of Britain.

Available warships:
1 Battleship - Bismarck (operational August 1940).
3 Heavy cruisers - Prinz Eugen (operational August 1940), Admiral Scheer, Lützow.
4 light cruisers - Emden, Köln, Leipzig, Nürnberg.
2 WWI battleships - Schleswig-Holstein, Schlesien.
10-15 destroyers (four of which were survivors of the Norwegian campaign).

Whoa!. Not a lot. And .... on the other side of the North sea.

[Die Hard]

The only two "Modern" Battleships Germany had on the seas were the Scarnhorst and Gneisenau, actually listed as Battlecruisers.

Schlachtschiff Scharnhorst.

Schwerer Kreuzer Admiral Hipper.

Notice the difference.

There is quite a difference between launched and commisioned, not to mention being a part of an operation or not. Bismarck and Tirpitz were not ready at the Norwegian ops, nor planned for so, nor used at all. The Kriegsmarine had 2 Battlecruisers of more modern design in the ops and that was it.

Ack-Ack postulated that the Kriegsmarine lost a "sizable portion" of its modern warships in the Norwegian campaign and were thus "severely weakened" after the campaign. Bismarck and Prinz Eugen entered service two months after the Battle of Norway and thus strengthened the Kriegsmarine if not completely making up for the losses. This discussion is not about the the invasion force in Norway; this discussion is about how the losses of that campaign affected the whole Kriegsmarine.

BTW the date I have for Bismarck commisioned is 24 of August. That is more than 2 months after the complete capitulation of Norway. At least no misinterpration there. More than 3 months from the main operation though.

The naval battle did not end with the Norwegian surrender on land. The "sisters" were both still at sea when the Norwegians surrendered on June 10th; HMS Glorious having been sunk two days earlier. Scharnhorst was attacked again 7 days after the surrender by RN carrier aircraft. Later still the Gneisenau was torpedoed in the North Atlantic.

But, a misconception though...? From you:
"14 destroyers took part in the operation."
"Germany started the operation with four modern battleships, two WWI battleships, six heavy cruisers, six light cruisers and 30-odd destroyers."
Easy to misunderstand this. So, of 14 cruisers used they lost 10. There is then no myth about the German Zerstörer force coming back totally crippled from the engagements.

The Germans did not lose 10 cruisers.

As for the age of the ships by the way, the German Destroyers were relaitively new ships. They were bigger than the standard UK destroyers and thereby sported more armour and firepower. Actually the bigger ones had about the same caliber as light cruisers.

Fascinating. Still don't see the relevance to this discussion.

Now for that one:
"The Allied navies also suffered heavier losses."
I asked first. I pretty much had the idea that the tonnege would fall unfavourable to the allies due to the aircraft carrier, which is like 10 destroyers in tonneage.

More importantly the ton for ton production cost of an aircraft carrier far surpasses that of a destroyer or cruiser. The strategic importance of a carrier is also magnitudes greater than 10 destroyers or a couple of cruisers.

They struck luck when sinking HMS Glorious, although the shooting gallery ending with a semi-phyrric victory (Both Battleships RTB due to damage).

Only Sharnhorst was significantly damaged in that engagement. Gneisenau was later torpedoed by the British submarine Clyde in the North Atlantic and forced to return to the port of Trondheim for repairs. Both sisters were back in action before the end of the year.

[Die Hard]

Whoa!. Not a lot. And .... on the other side of the North sea.

What?

[Ack-Ack]

Ack-Ack postulated that the Kriegsmarine lost a "sizable portion" of its modern warships in the Norwegian campaign and were thus "severely weakened" after the campaign. Bismarck and Prinz Eugen entered service two months after the Battle of Norway and thus strengthened the Kriegsmarine if not completely making up for the losses. This discussion is not about the the invasion force in Norway; this discussion is about how the losses of that campaign affected the whole Kriegsmarine.

The Kriegsmarine did lose a sizable portion of their surface fleet in the Norwegian Campaign that directly affected the Kriegsmarine's ability to support Operation Sea Lion.  That is what I said in my initial post and it's a fact, the losses the Kriegsmarine suffered left it in such a state that it could not provide the support needed to secure and then defend the landing beaches.  They didn't have the experience, logistics or sufficient ships to do the job.


ack-ack

[Die Hard]

The Kriegsmarine did lose a sizable portion of their surface fleet in the Norwegian Campaign that directly affected the Kriegsmarine's ability to support Operation Sea Lion.  That is what I said in my initial post and it's a fact, the losses the Kriegsmarine suffered left it in such a state that it could not provide the support needed to secure and then defend the landing beaches.  They didn't have the experience, logistics or sufficient ships to do the job.


ack-ack

That's a moot point; even with the ships they lost in the Norwegian campaign the Kriegsmarine wouldn't have been able to support any landing operation against Britain as long as the Royal Navy still existed. Only the Luftwaffe could have made it possible (and even that is arguable), but they failed.

[Ack-Ack]

That's a moot point; even with the ships they lost in the Norwegian campaign the Kriegsmarine wouldn't have been able to support any landing operation against Britain as long as the Royal Navy still existed. Only the Luftwaffe could have made it possible (and even that is arguable), but they failed.

It's only a moot point because you don't agree with it.  If you look back at my original post, my post was in reply to Unit's post about Germany being able to invade England and I just pointed out some facts that it wouldn't have been possible for Germany to successfully invade England.  You pick and choose certain parts of a person's post to make an argument, it's all you've ever done on these boards and usually do it when you're incorrect about something on the whole. 


ack-ack

[Die Hard]

I didn't disagree with the rest of your post; only that part. If you have a problem with that... Tough.

[Angus]

The Whoa! Refers to the German home-base being Wilhelmshaven, leaving the North sea between the German base and Seelöve theater of ops. While they got a long way through in the channel dash without being spotted, they still got hurt, and that run was made in the darkness of the winter. Seelöve means crossing with a very short night, and it is some 300-350 nautical miles.
Now:
"Only Sharnhorst was significantly damaged in that engagement. Gneisenau was later torpedoed by the British submarine Clyde in the North Atlantic and forced to return to the port of Trondheim for repairs. Both sisters were back in action before the end of the year."
Yes, I know. There was also some damage inflicted on the 9th of april when HMS Renown fought the two of them. Gneisenau also took quite some destroyer hits in theGlorious engagement.
Then:
"The Germans did not lose 10 cruisers."
You lucky you, I meant destroyers. They lost 10.DD
UND:
"Ack-Ack postulated that the Kriegsmarine lost a "sizable portion" of its modern warships in the Norwegian campaign and were thus "severely weakened" after the campaign. Bismarck and Prinz Eugen entered service two months after the Battle of Norway and thus strengthened the Kriegsmarine if not completely making up for the losses. This discussion is not about the the invasion force in Norway; this discussion is about how the losses of that campaign affected the whole Kriegsmarine. "
Jolly good. We just disagree about the magnitude. I go with ack-ack (And probably admiral Raeder) on the theory that after Weserubung the hope of posing a significant threat in the English channel, or being off proper suport in beach landings was thwarted.
And that:
"
Schlachtschiff Scharnhorst.

Schwerer Kreuzer Admiral Hipper.

Notice the difference."
I do. The RN however referred to them as "Battlecruisers" arguing that 11" main armament was not enough. The Kriegsmarine would also name The "pocket" Battleships "Schwere Kreuzer". It's a matter of taste really. If anything the RN's definition seems to use more categorizing, which I think is good. Anyway, an 11 inch shell is about 300-336 kg's (Battlecruisers and pocket Battleships), a 14 inch shell is already 721 kg (British KGV class), and the 15" some odd 871 kg (Most British main battleships + Bismarck class which had an 800 kg shell).  Then the 16 inch gun (Nelson/Rodney) Then lobbed a whooping 929 kg shell.
That partially explains that the Scarngorst-Gneisenau gang avoided contact with the British capital ships, be it a WWI construction or not. And that happened a few times.

[oakranger]

Or the German escorts screaming on Channel 200 how the timid RAF pilots wouldn't engage their fighters.


ack-ack

 

[Simba]

"If France is defeated, the Germans will wring the neck of the British, as of a chicken"

To which Churchill replied, 'Some chicken! Some neck!'

Ah yes, the German destroyers sunk at the two Battles of Narvik. Well done, Warburton-Lee, who led the first attack, by RN destroyers alone, paid the ultimate price and was awarded a posthumous Victoria Cross for his boldness. And well done, the Swordfish floatplane that was catapulted from Warspite at the start of the second, discovered and relayed the positions of all the German ships remaining, spotted and reported the fall of shot of the first salvoes from the battleship and kept Vice-Admiral Whitworth informed of all subsequent enemy movements, bombed a destroyer, bombed and sank submarine U64 anchored close to the cliffs (the Fleet Air Arm's first U-boat kill of the war) - and finally landed with a tail shredded by return fire from the U-boat, to be hoisted back aboard and cheered to the echo. The efforts of non-commissioned Petty Officer Pilot F.C. Rice, Observer Lt.Cdr. W.L.M. Brown and Telegraphist Air Gunner M.G. Pacey were described in Whitworth's report to the Admiralty: 'The enemy reports made by Warspite's aircraft were invaluable. I doubt if ever a shipborne aircraft has been used to such good purpose as it was in this operation.'

Too bloody right - Find, Fix and Strike!

 

[Angus]

Incredible! And what ordnance could it carry? Sinking a sub, just incredible!!!
Did it land on sea though?

[Simba]

The Swordfish landed back on the water in the lee of Warspite after a total of four hours in the air (it touched down for a short interval during the battle after sinking U64 so the pilot could check the tail damage) and was hoisted back aboard using the deck crane fitted for the purpose. Its armament was four 250 lb bombs and eight smoke markers, plus a Vickers Gas-Operated machine-gun for the TAG. I've never managed to ascertain whether the aircraft carried a forward-firing Vickers gun; relatively useless in action, it was taken out of most operational Swordfish to save weight.

Petty Officer Rice was awarded the D.S.M., Lt-Cdr. Brown the D.S.C. - and Leading Airman TAG Pacey got bugger-all, the usual lot of poor bloody TAGs throughout the war. Rice was later commissioned and finished the war as a Lt-Cdr; he flew another crucial sortie in a catapult Swordfish floatplane, when he flew recce and spotted for the guns of the Mediterranean Fleet at the Battle of Cape Matapan in 1941.

At the conclusion of the Norwegian campaign, Captain Troubridge of HMS Furious made his report of proceedings. It included a tribute to his own aircrews in Furious and has ever since been taken to apply to all the Fleet Air Arm crews who flew over Norway:

'It is difficult to speak without emotion of the pluck and endurance of the young officers and men, some of them midshipmen, who flew their aircraft to such good effect . . . all were firing their first shot in action, whether torpedo, bomb or machine-gun . . . undeterred by the loss of several of their shipmates, their honour and courage remained throughout as dazzling as the snow-covered mountains over which they so triumphantly flew.'

 

[Angus]

So the Swordfish had floaters. Never knew how they dealt with them. Thought it was a one-way trip only.
Wonder if Warspite then mostly kept to itself, for it's difficult to hoist a bipe out of the sea in the middle of a battle, if you see what I mean. But Warspite did sink some however, and the golden rule is "If the enemy is in range, so are you". Well not on the high seasBB vs DD, but in a fjord???
Cape Matapan also could be a promotant of a turning point in the Naval war in the Med. And wasn't it there where Warspite made a 15" hit on a moving target from 26Kilometers, thereby holding the world record???
Some darn good spotter they had