# Big gun naval battles **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 24, 2008, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555 "2008-03-24T17:09:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Hypno-Toad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b2d939/32.png) [@Hypno-Toad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypno-Toad)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2008, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/1 "2008-03-24T17:09:36Z")
The battle of the Jutland is to my knowledge the grand daddy of old-school dreadnought sea actions. No radar, no guided weapons (torpedoes had to be pre-set, no changing course after launching them) no airstrikes. Just guys with mechanical calculators doing math really quickly while other men use winches and muscles to load 12-14 inch shells. But were there any battles fought this way before the Jutland? After the advent of HMS Dreadnought, but before Skaggerak? ---
**Author:** ![Pushkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ee59a6/32.png) [@Pushkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pushkin)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2008, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/2 "2008-03-24T17:43:30Z")
There was one other naval battle, with pre-dreadnought vessels, that springs to mind; the [Battle of Tsushima](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tsushima). Russians on their way from the East of Russia, to participate in the Russo-Japanese war were engaged in another battle, that might not be up your alley, the [Dogger Bank incident](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogger_Bank_incident) . ---
**Author:** ![Pushkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ee59a6/32.png) [@Pushkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pushkin)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2008, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/3 "2008-03-24T17:50:26Z")
:smack: Meant to say too, they used pre-dreadnoughts, but the Japanese used them in the way later battleships would be used, lots of big guns, firing at long rang. ---
**Author:** ![Hypno-Toad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b2d939/32.png) [@Hypno-Toad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypno-Toad)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2008, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/4 "2008-03-24T17:51:18Z")
Yeah, Tsushima fits the bill. It was pre-dreadnought but post black-powder. I’d like to see the computers they used for calculating firing solutions. Probably very specialized slide-rule- type instruments. ---
**Author:** ![Spiny\_Norman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@Spiny\_Norman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spiny_Norman)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2008, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/5 "2008-03-24T20:30:55Z")
Stationed at Tsingtao, China (hence the excellent pilsner type beer brewed there), the squadron was engaged by forces of the Royal Navy in two battles, Coronel (German victory) and Falkland Islands (British victory). The squadron consisted of modern (but obviously still pre-dreadnought) armoured cruisers, with the British force at the Falklands battle led by the dreadnought battlecruisers HMS Invincible and HMS Inflexible. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2008, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/6 "2008-03-24T20:38:26Z")
[QUOTE=Hypno-Toad] Yeah, Tsushima fits the bill. It was pre-dreadnought but post black-powder. I’d like to see the computers they used for calculating firing solutions. Probably very specialized slide-rule- type instruments. [/QUOTE] By WW1, the British and Americans were developing mechanical computers for fire control. The British used the system developed by this fella: [Frederic Dreyer - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederic_Charles_Dreyer) I bought a couple books on this topic this last year. Some of the math is above my high school level algebra, but it is interesting reading about some of the challenges these folks had to overcome. basically, the combat ranges had increased (by 1910) to a distance where you had to “lead” the target. (Shot traveling at 2000ft/min takes 15 seconds to travel 10000 yards, and a ship could travel 500 feet in that time.) This means you had to accurately predict the targets speed, course, distance, in relation to your own steaming and rolling. These mechanical aids were to help try to eliminate some of the mental gymnastics (which would be subject to combat stress) on the part of the fire control officer. Here’s what needs to be done every 30 seconds, or so: [US Naval Fire Control, 1918](http://www.gwpda.org/naval/usnfirec.htm) ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2008, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/7 "2008-03-24T20:39:36Z")
Dogger Bank was another WW1 (pre Jutland) action, essentially a chase within gun range. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2008, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/8 "2008-03-24T23:14:26Z")
I have always wondered at the German behavior in the (unequal) contest. Von Spee’s light cruisers ( 8"guns) were bearing down on the Falklands islands-intent on a bit of pillage (they planned to shell the port of Stanley). Then, they spotted the British task force (Adm. Sturdee’s battleships, armed with 12" guns). So, the Germans reversed course, bu their doom was sealed (the British battleships were faster by about 5 knots). To my mind, the Germans should have attacked the British fleet (before they could get steam up); or (failing that) they should have scattered-with each ship taking a different course;perhaps a few would have escaped. As it were, Von Spee’s orce was persued by the British, and all but one ship were sunk. The British had spectacularly bad shooting-they fired off over 1200 shells, achieving about a 1% hit rate-but sank all but one of the enemy. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/9 "2008-03-25T02:07:57Z")
[QUOTE=ralph124c] I have always wondered at the German behavior in the (unequal) contest. Von Spee’s light cruisers ( 8"guns) were bearing down on the Falklands islands-intent on a bit of pillage (they planned to shell the port of Stanley). Then, they spotted the British task force (Adm. Sturdee’s battleships, armed with 12" guns). So, the Germans reversed course, bu their doom was sealed (the British battleships were faster by about 5 knots). [/quote] He didn’t know he faced a stronger, faster, opponent until the chase was on. > [@](#): > > To my mind, the Germans should have attacked the British fleet (before they could get steam up); His shells would not have hurt the ships that mattered (BC’s and pre-dreadnought). > [@](#): > > or (failing that) they should have scattered-with each ship taking a different course;perhaps a few would have escaped. He _did_ scatter his force. The BC’s (_Invincible_ & _Inflexible_) killed the armored cruisers, the _Kent_ chased and sank the _Nurnberg_, the _Glasgow_ and the _Cornwall_ sank the _Leipzig_. > [@](#): > > As it were, Von Spee’s orce was persued by the British, and all but one ship were sunk. The British had spectacularly bad shooting-they fired off over 1200 shells, achieving about a 1% hit rate-but sank all but one of the enemy. The British were blinded by their own funnel and gun smoke. See picture and maps on this site: [http://www.histarmar.com.ar/InfHistorica/CoronelyMalvinas/LaBatalladeMalvinas.htm](http://www.histarmar.com.ar/InfHistorica/CoronelyMalvinas/LaBatalladeMalvinas.htm) ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/10 "2008-03-25T02:15:16Z")
There are some illustrations here of some of the mechanical aids the British came up with during the 1910 to 1916 time frame. [http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/tech/essays/FireControl/ArgoAimCorrector/](http://www.dreadnoughtproject.org/tech/essays/FireControl/ArgoAimCorrector/) The big gun, in 1905, far outranged the ability to accurately hit with it. At the turn of the century, battlefleet gunnery practice was held at around 3000 to 5000 yards. As torpedo range and accuracy improved, the battle ranges had to be pushed further and further out. The Battles at the Falklands Islands, Dogger Bank, and Jutland were held at ranges (15k yards) that would have been thought incredible a mere 10 years earlier. ---
**Author:** ![Pushkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ee59a6/32.png) [@Pushkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pushkin)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/11 "2008-03-25T14:27:59Z")
[QUOTE=ralph124c] The British had spectacularly bad shooting-they fired off over 1200 shells, achieving about a 1% hit rate-but sank all but one of the enemy. [/QUOTE] I’ve seen that mentioned as a side effect of the coriolis effect and the British gunners forgetting they were in the southern hemisphere, any truth to this? ---
**Author:** ![Danimal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/bb73d2/32.png) [@Danimal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Danimal)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/12 "2008-03-25T17:53:12Z")
How about the battles of Manila Bay and Santiago de Cuba in the Spanish-American War? Or the battle of the Yalu River in 1894? The Chinese had two battleships in that action. ---
**Author:** ![Cerowyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/82dd89/32.png) [@Cerowyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cerowyn)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2008, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/13 "2008-03-25T20:16:48Z")
[QUOTE=Danimal] How about the battles of Manila Bay and Santiago de Cuba in the Spanish-American War? Or the battle of the Yalu River in 1894? The Chinese had two battleships in that action. [/QUOTE] Of all the forces in the two Spanish-American War battles, only the Americans had battleships, and only at Santiago de Cuba. The first Battle of Yalu River was an unmitigated disaster for the Chinese. The Japanese did not have any battleships, but the Chinese were undone by their own incompetence, inexperience and corruption. They managed to chase off the Japanese, but at the expense of greater loss of ships and life. ---
**Author:** ![Hypno-Toad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b2d939/32.png) [@Hypno-Toad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypno-Toad)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2008, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/14 "2008-03-26T12:44:06Z")
**MLees** , those links are awesome. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2008, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/15 "2008-03-26T16:39:41Z")
If your really really interested in this topic, **Hypno-Toad** , the two books I recently got are: _Naval Firepower: Battleship Guns and Gunnery in the Dreadnaught Era_ by John Brooks, and _Dreadnought Gunnery and the Battle of Jutland: The Question of Fire Control_ by Norman Friedman. They were a bit pricey (I bought the hardcover), and a bit dry in spots. But they seem to be comprehensive to my Armchair-Admiral eyes. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2008, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/16 "2008-03-26T16:55:31Z")
[QUOTE=ralph124c] I have always wondered at the German behavior in the (unequal) contest. Von Spee’s light cruisers ( 8"guns) were bearing down on the Falklands islands-intent on a bit of pillage (they planned to shell the port of Stanley). Then, they spotted the British task force (Adm. Sturdee’s battleships, armed with 12" guns). So, the Germans reversed course, bu their doom was sealed (the British battleships were faster by about 5 knots). To my mind, the Germans should have attacked the British fleet (before they could get steam up [/QUOTE] As noted, the Germans didn’t know that faster battle cruisers would be pursuing them. They were aware that a big gun ship was in port since it fired on their advance group (the ship in question turned out to be an old, beached pre-dreadnought, HMS Canopus) but not of the key members of the British squadron. Had they attacked the port it’s been theorized they could have created havoc and done considerable damage before the British could have gotten out to engage them, but that’s essentially hindsight talking. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2008, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/17 "2008-03-26T17:02:13Z")
WW II featured more big-gun combats than we remember. I often see assertions that battleships “never fought each other” in WW II, as if the Bismarck never sailed or something. The naval fighting off Guadalcanal featured some real hammer-and-tongs gun duels, mostly at night; although much of that was conducted by cruisers and destroyers, there was pair of culminating battleship actions [in November](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_battle_of_guadalcanal#First_Naval_Battle_of_Guadalcanal.2C_November_13). Sailboat ---
**Author:** ![Hypno-Toad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b2d939/32.png) [@Hypno-Toad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypno-Toad)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2008, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/18 "2008-03-26T19:11:26Z")
[QUOTE=mlees] If your really really interested in this topic, **Hypno-Toad** , the two books I recently got are: _Naval Firepower: Battleship Guns and Gunnery in the Dreadnaught Era_ by John Brooks, and _Dreadnought Gunnery and the Battle of Jutland: The Question of Fire Control_ by Norman Friedman. They were a bit pricey (I bought the hardcover), and a bit dry in spots. But they seem to be comprehensive to my Armchair-Admiral eyes. 🙂 [/QUOTE] These are both now on my list. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2008, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/19 "2008-03-26T22:39:11Z")
I mean, after his sinking of Adm. Cradock’s pathetic force, the British were out for revenge…but the South Atlantic is a big place-did Von Spee have any idea of who was after him? As I said, he would have been better off to have bombarded Port Stanley while the British were in harbor-he might have managed to sink a few of the enemy. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2008, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555/20 "2008-03-27T15:52:51Z")
[QUOTE=ralph124c] I mean, after his sinking of Adm. Cradock’s pathetic force, the British were out for revenge..but the South Atlantic is a big place-did Von Spee have any idea of who was after him? As I said, he would have been better off to have bombarded Port Stanley while the British were in harbor-he might have managed to sink a few of the enemy. [/QUOTE] I don’t know anything about the physical layout there. But specifically, if he rushed the harbor, could he have met the British coming out and perhaps sunk one across the channel or harbor mouth and bottled up the big battlecruisers? It seems like a long shot, but not as long as the running defeat in which he ultimately found himself. Sailboat [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/big-gun-naval-battles/442555.md?page=2)