BATTLE JUTLAND WW I COPYRIGHT F. GADEK 02/14/2005 1 TOPIC – “ DETAILS GREAT JUTLAND NAVAL BATTLE WW I “ SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & SOCIETY { “STS” } BY FRANK

BATTLE JUTLAND WW I COPYRIGHT F. GADEK 02/14/2005 1

TOPIC –

“ DETAILS GREAT JUTLANDNAVAL BATTLE WW I “

SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & SOCIETY { “STS” }

BY

FRANK J. GADEK, PH.D.

“ “ STILL INITIAL DRAFT ONLY “ STILL INITIAL DRAFT ONLY “



NAVAL BATTLE OF JUTLANDNAVAL BATTLE OF JUTLAND

BETWEEN BRITAIN AND GERMANYBETWEEN BRITAIN AND GERMANY

ONE OF GREATEST IN HISTORYONE OF GREATEST IN HISTORY

MAY 31, 1916MAY 31, 1916


BRITISH ADMIRAL JELLICOE COMMANDEDBRITISH ADMIRAL JELLICOE COMMANDED

THE THE “MOST POWERFUL FLEET”“MOST POWERFUL FLEET” EVER SENT EVER SENT

TO SEA IN WAR UNDER TO SEA IN WAR UNDER

““ONE MAN’S ONE MAN’S

COMMAND”COMMAND”

[HOWARTH, P#410]


NAVAL BATTLE OF JUTLANDNAVAL BATTLE OF JUTLAND

THE GRAND FLEET = BRITISHTHE GRAND FLEET = BRITISH

THE HIGH SEAS FLEET = GERMANTHE HIGH SEAS FLEET = GERMAN

LASTED ABOUT LASTED ABOUT 5 HOURS5 HOURS

TYPICAL BATTLE ISSUES DEVELOPEDTYPICAL BATTLE ISSUES DEVELOPED::LUCKLUCKMISTAKESMISTAKESCOMMUNICATIONCOMMUNICATIONEQUIPMENTEQUIPMENTPEOPLEPEOPLEETC.ETC.

NO CLEAR VICTORY, ONLY UNRESOLVEDNO CLEAR VICTORY, ONLY UNRESOLVEDAND DEBATABLE COMPLEXITIESAND DEBATABLE COMPLEXITIES






VERY DIFFICULT TO REALLY COMPARE

BRITISH & GERMAN FLEETS

DUE TO SO MANY AND COMPLEX FACTORS,

ESPECIALLY FOR SUCH NEW, INNOVATIVE

AND UNTESTED SHIPS OF THIS NEW ERA

OF MODERN AND CONSTANTLY EVOLVING

NAVAL WARFARE


NOTE:

SOME SOURCES DO NOT AGREEON THE EXACT NUMBERS OF SHIPS, GUNS, CREW, ETC.FOR VARIOUS REASONS

HOWEVER, A GENERAL IDEA OF THE SIZES OF EACH SIDE CAN STILLBE APPRECIATED


ALSO, MANY OTHER FACTORS ALSO ARE INVOLVEDALSO, MANY OTHER FACTORS ALSO ARE INVOLVED:GERMAN SHIPS BUILT BETTER TO WITHSTAND

HITSGERMAN SHIPS STRESSED ARMOUR & GUNS –

“SURVIVAL”BRITISH SHIPS STRESSED SPEED & GUNS -

“HIT & RUN”BRITISH SHIPS BUILT TO “LIVE ON” GERMAN SHIPS BUILT FOR SHORT TIMES AT SEA

– A FEW DAYSCONTROVERSY ABOUT EFFECTIVENESS OF

PROJECTILES / SHELLSGERMANS BETTER AT NIGHT FIGHTING AT SEABRITISH SHIP MAJOR DEFECT – BYPASSED SAFETY

PROCEDURES TO MINIMIZE “FLASH”SUPPRESSION OF PROPELLANTS WHEN HITSO COULD FIRE FASTER

ETC.


BRITISH FLEET:

151 SHIPS60,000 MEN

GERMAN FLEET:

99 SHIPS36,000 MEN

[WWW.FRANKLYNCARDS.COM]


BRITISH:28 BATTLESHIPS8 BATTLECRUISERS

GERMANY:22 BATTLESHIPS5 BATTLECRUISERS

LOSSES:BRITISH 115,025 TONSGERMAN 61,180

“RATIO = 1.9”

ON PAPER – VICTORY LAYWITH GERMANS

[GEORGE, P#16]


EVENING MAY 30, 1916 BRITISH GRAND FLEETEVENING MAY 30, 1916 BRITISH GRAND FLEETHEADING TO JUTLAND BANK UNDER JELLICOEHEADING TO JUTLAND BANK UNDER JELLICOE

3 FORMATIONS150 SHIPS28 DREADNOUGHT BATTLESHIPS9 DREADNOUGHT BATTLE CRUISERS8 ARMOURED CRUISERS26 LIGHT CRUISERS78 DESTROYERS1 MINELAYER1 AIRCRAFT CARRIER

[MASSIE #2, P#577]


COMPARE BRITISH & GERMAN FLEETS AT JUTLANDCOMPARE BRITISH & GERMAN FLEETS AT JUTLANDSHIPSBRITISH GERMANDREADNOUGHT BATTLESHIPS

28 16BATTLE CRUISERS

9 5LIGHTER CRAFT 113 72GUN POWERHEAVY NAVAL GUNS ONLY FOR “BATTLESHIPS”

272 20015” 4814” 1013.5” 11012” 104 12811” 72[MASSIE #2, P#577]


BATTLE CRUISERS – MORE DISPARATEBATTLE CRUISERS – MORE DISPARATE

GUNS BRITISH GERMAN

13.5” 3212” 40 1611” 28

BRITISH SPEED ADVANTAGE – 2 - 3 KNOTS FASTER

[MASSIE #2, P#577]


NOW 58 MOVING NOW 58 MOVING “CASTLES OF GRAY STEEL”“CASTLES OF GRAY STEEL”

– “THE DREADNOUGHTS” -

OF THE 2 GREATEST NAVIES

WERE ABOUT TO COLLIDE

[MASSIE #2, P#578]


BUT MODERN WARFARE WAS BUT MODERN WARFARE WAS VERYVERY

DIFFERENTDIFFERENT FROM PAST WARFARE FROM PAST WARFARE

DUE TO DUE TO NEWNEW SCI / TECH SCI / TECH

DEVELOPMENTSDEVELOPMENTS


NELSON’S TRAFALGAR:SPEED 1 – 3 KNOTS5 HOURS BETWEEN SIGHTING / OPENING FIREAFTER 4.5 HOURS CANNON FIRE AT RANGES AS

CLOSE AS 10 YARDS, NO SHIP SUNKBOARDING / CAPTURE WHAT COUNTEDHAD MUCH EXPERIENCE IN THIS TYPE OF STRATEGYMANY “TESTS” OF SUCH SHIPS IN BATTLE

BEATTY’S JUTLAND:SPEED > 26 KNOTS18 MINUTES BETWEEN SIGHTING / OPENING FIREIN LESS THAN 1 HOUR, 1/3 OF HIS BATTLE

CRUISERS BLOWN UPHAD NO EXPERIENCE IN THIS TYPE OF STRATEGYNO PREVIOUS “TEST” OF SUCH SHIPS IN BATTLE

[HOUGH, P#267]


NEW NAVAL WARFARE ISSUESNEW NAVAL WARFARE ISSUES:

TORPEDOS HAD RANGE OF ABOUT 20,000 YARDS OR60,000 FEET OR 12 MILES

12” GUN PROJECTILES WEIGHED ALMOST 1/2 TON = 1000 LBS

COULD BE SHOT ABOUT 18,500 YARDS, OR ABOUT 10 MILES

TOOK ONLY ABOUT 30 SECONDS TO REACH TARGET

SO NEW TACTICS INVOLVED VERY FAST LONG RANGESHOOTING

CAPTAIN OF SHIPS HAD VERY LITTLE TIME TO REACT

[HOUGH, P#27, 268, 270]


NEW 15” SHELLS:ABOUT 1 TONABOUT 20 MILES

[HOUGH, P#27]ME - YOU COULD NOT SEE SHIPS DUE TO THEHORIZON, BUT COULD SEE THEIR SMOKE,BUT IF NO SMOKE, THEN ONLY GUN FLASHES& SHIPS CLOSE TO YOU IN ½ HOUR

18” SHEELS FOUND TO DO TOO MUCH DAMAGE TO THEIR OWN SHIP ON FIRING,SO ABANDONED[WWW.FRIESIAN.COM/DREADNOT.HTM]

BEFORE 68 POUND SOLID SHOTNOW 16” RIFLED BREECH LOADING GUNSFIRING EXPLOSIVE CHARGES

IN DEFENCE – ARMOUR-PLATE INCREASEDABOUT 28% OF TONNAGE

[HOUGH, P#8-9]


NOW MUCH MORE DANGEROUS SITUATIONNOW MUCH MORE DANGEROUS SITUATION::INVINCIBLE

DIRECT HIT AND MAGAZINE EXPLODEDALL CREW LOST EXCEPT 5 OF 1031SANK IMMEDIATELYSPLIT IN TWO – EACH END STOOD

UPRIGHT IN SHALLOW WATERSPEED = 25 KNOTS [NOT 20 OF BATTLESHIPS]WEIGHT = 17,250 TONS [LIKE BATTLESHIPS]567 FEET LONG, 79 FEET WIDE, DRAUGHT

27 FEETCOST = 1,767,515 BRITISH POUNDS £

[ESTIMATE $70,700,600 IN TODAY’S US DOLLARS]

[HOUGH, P#246, MASSIE #1, P493, 911; WORLDWAR1.CO.UK/BATTLECRUISER]]


FATAL FLAW OF NEW BATTLE “CRUISERS”FATAL FLAW OF NEW BATTLE “CRUISERS”LIKE INVINCIBLELIKE INVINCIBLE

LIGHTER ARMOUR THAN BATTLESHIPS SO COULD INCREASE SPEED

EXTRA WEIGHT WENT TO ENGINES FOR SPEEDORIGINALLY WERE TO BE USED LIKE “CALVARY”

AND NOT GO DIRECTLY AGAINST BATTLESHIPS

BUT LATER “CONFUSION” ON HOW TO USE

“GUNS, ARMOUR AND SPEED” ALL INTERRELATED CAN MAXIMIZE 2 BUT DIFFICULT TO MAXIMIZE ALL 3

[MASSIE #1, P#493-4]


SO SO LIMITSLIMITS OF OF PRESENTPRESENT SCI / TECH SCI / TECH

STARTED TO BECOME MORE EVIDENT STARTED TO BECOME MORE EVIDENT

AND ACCEPTED, UNTIL AND ACCEPTED, UNTIL NEWNEW SCI / TECH SCI / TECH

COULD OVERCOME THESE LIMITSCOULD OVERCOME THESE LIMITS

IN IN INNOVATIVE AND CREATIVEINNOVATIVE AND CREATIVE

WAYS, WAYS, IN AN EVER EXPANDING IN AN EVER EXPANDING

PROCESS OF PROCESS OF CONTINUAL EVOLUTIONCONTINUAL EVOLUTION


COMPARISON OF BRITISH AND GERMAN FLEETS AT JUTLANDF. GADEK, 02/15/2005

ITEM BRITISHGERMAN RATIO SHIPS LOST BRITISH GERMAN DEATHS BRITISH GERMANBRITISH GERMAN % % BRITISH GERMAN % %

SHIPS 151 99 1.5 14 11 9 11MEN 60000 36000 1.7 6097 2551 10 7

[HOUGH, P#296, WWW.FRANKLYNCARDS.COM]


LOSSES AT JUTLAND NAVAL BATTLEF. GADEK, 02/15/2005

JUST SIMPLE NUMBERS

SHIPS BRITISH GERMAN*BATTLESHIP 1BATTLE-CRUISERS 3 1*ARMORED CRUISERS 3DESTROYERS 8 5LIGHT CRUISERS 4TOTAL 14 11

# DEAD 6097 2551

NOTES: [1] FROM HOUGH, P#296[2] * = NEGLIGIBLE VALUE


BUT OTHER IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONSBUT OTHER IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS:

LOSS OF SHIPS – MARGINALLY IN GERMAN FAVORDAMAGED SHIPS – IN BRITISH FAVOR

NOT A BRITISH TRAFALGAR TYPE OF VICTORY,BUT GERMAN FLEET “ESCAPED ONLY BY THE

SKIN OF ITS TEETH”

GERMAN OBJECTIVE – TRAP / DESTROY PARTOF BRITISH FLEET – FAILED – NEVERTRIED MUCH AGAIN – KEPT IN PORTFOR MOST PART

BRITISH OBJECTIVE – SURVIVE TO MAINTAINGERMAN BLOCKADE – SUCCESSFUL!!!

[HOUGH, P#296, MASSIE #2, P#682]


ALSO, GERMAN NAVY MORALE PLUMMETED& EVENTUALLY LED TO MUTINY!

BUT BRITISH ADMIRAL JELLICO WAS CRITICIZED BY SOME FOR MISSINGAN OPPORTUNITY OF ELIMINATINGTHE GERMAN NAVY IN A DECISIVEBATTLE LIKE NELSON AT TRAFALGAR

HOWEVER, JELLICO’S CONSERVATIVISMMINIMIZED SUCH A DISASTER FOR THE BRITISH NAVY, WHICH WAS MORE CRITICAL


REALLY HAVE TO READ REFERENCESTO FORM YOUR OWN “INFORMED

OPINION!”

SINCE SO COMPLEX & SO MANYCONTROVERSIES


TO BE CONTINUED AS TO BE CONTINUED AS

INTEREST &INTEREST &

RESOURCES PERMITRESOURCES PERMIT

JUST LET ME KNOW !JUST LET ME KNOW !

Documents

BATTLE JUTLAND WW I COPYRIGHT F. GADEK 02/14/2005 1 TOPIC – “ DETAILS GREAT JUTLAND NAVAL BATTLE WW I “ SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY & SOCIETY { “STS” } BY FRANK