# The Hornblower Gambit: Could you get away with this? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 19, 2010, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980 "2010-03-19T04:23:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Claverhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/13edae/32.png) [@Claverhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Claverhouse)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/21 "2010-03-20T10:25:13Z")
> [@Alka\_Seltzer](#): > > [QUOTE=Jackmannii] > Not very sporting, what ? No, but neither is torpedoing merchant ships. [/QUOTE] Under all laws of blockade merchant ships are fair targets, and this applies to all wars. Half a century before WWI the two sides in the War Between The States were busy… It is fair to say that the Confederate raiders practically destroyed the United States’ merchant marine. Although there were never more than a handful of raiders operating at one time and although the number of ships sunk, a few hundred, was not a great proportion of the total number of American merchant ships, the very presence of the raiders drove up the insurance rates for Union shipping so high that it was not economically viable to ship cargos in Union hulls. Union merchantmen were sold to neutrals at knock down prices and sunken ships were not replaced. When the war ended the westward expansion of the railroads offered better investment opportunities than shipping so the merchant marine was not rebuilt, it was not until World War One that America regained its position in world shipping. [http://hksw.org/american%20civil%20war\_naval%20part%20II.htm](http://hksw.org/american%20civil%20war_naval%20part%20II.htm) Unpleasant undoubtedly, but no-one expects war to be decent. ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 10:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/22 "2010-03-20T10:39:10Z")
> [@Askance](#): > > The German auxiliary cruiser [Kormoran](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_auxiliary_cruiser_Kormoran) sunk the Australian light cruiser HMAS Sydney through exactly this kind of tactic in 1941. Disguised as a Dutch merchant ship she lured the larger ship within range of her smaller guns, dropped her disguise and opened up. Despite being only armed and armoured as a merchant raider she sunk the Sydney with all 645 hands, losing only 70 of her own 400 crew (but they were forced to abandon ship and beach due to damage suffered). > > No, there were no political repercussions. But this was WWII Germany we’re talking about here, not exactly a high point in military gallantry. To add to this, the German crew of the **Kormoran** claimed they ran up their true flag as, or just barely before, opening fire, so as to conform to the letter if not the spirit of the Articles of War. ---
**Author:** ![kombatminipig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b5ac83/32.png) [@kombatminipig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kombatminipig)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 10:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/23 "2010-03-20T10:49:35Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > In modern warfare, at least, there’s the notion of “recognition codes”, where one ship can challenge another with a code, and expect to get the appropriate response. Nowadays, this would be done with computers and asymmetric public-key encryption, but was there some lower-tech equivalent used before computers? Alternately, did ships carry books of lists of legitimate vessels, so if an unknown vessel claimed to be the Dutch-registry merchantman _Tulip_, say, you could at least verify that there was a Dutch ship by that name? I remember reading that, at least in WW2, cruisers carried ships registers in order to identify suspected commerce raiders. ---
**Author:** ![Mogle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mogle/32/12021_2.png) [@Mogle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mogle)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/24 "2010-03-20T12:30:35Z")
> [@Askance](#): > > To add to this, the German crew of the **Kormoran** claimed they ran up their true flag as, or just barely before, opening fire, so as to conform to the letter if not the spirit of the Articles of War. To add even more, at first the Kormoran tried to evade but when that failed(because the Sydney was the faster ship) the Germans tried to convince the Sydney that they really were harmless Dutch merchants. What ultimately blew their cover was the Sydney’s request for their secret sign, something the Kormoran didn’t have. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/25 "2010-03-20T14:23:25Z")
During [Operation Chariot](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Nazaire_Raid), _HMS Campbeltown_, leading the assault, was not only flying German colours on the approach and using German signals, but had been modified before the raid to more closely resemble a German destroyer. As mentioned in this thread, she hoisted Royal Navy colours before actually engaging. The tactic was good for at least five minutes stalling and got the force within a mile of the target. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/26 "2010-03-20T15:55:53Z")
So in the Hornblower books what was the dispute about the tactic’s legality that led the French to order him tried? ---
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2010, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/27 "2010-03-21T00:07:14Z")
> [@davekhps](#): > > The Germans didn’t just do this on the Western Front in WWII, but also in the East-- [see this page for German-captured T-34s disguised as Soviet tanks](http://www.achtungpanzer.com/panzerkampfwagen-t-34r-soviet-t-34-in-german-service.htm). > > In [David Glantz’s book on the Battle of Kursk](http://www.amazon.com/Battle-Kursk-David-M-Glantz/dp/0700613358), he recounts the opening moves of Army Detachment Kempf which involved a night road march of a German column led by the captured T-34s. In the darkness, they passed multiple Soviet checkpoints fooling the defenders, at least for a little while. The Russians also used the tactic at the start of their ultimate attack on the German forces at Stalingrad. They used captured German tanks as the spearhead to overrun the non German Axis allies out on the flanks to enable the surrounding of the city. ---
**Author:** ![Shmendrik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ee7513/32.png) [@Shmendrik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shmendrik)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2010, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/28 "2010-03-21T04:37:41Z")
> [@davekhps](#): > > The Germans didn’t just do this on the Western Front in WWII, but also in the East-- [see this page for German-captured T-34s disguised as Soviet tanks](http://www.achtungpanzer.com/panzerkampfwagen-t-34r-soviet-t-34-in-german-service.htm). > > In [David Glantz’s book on the Battle of Kursk](http://www.amazon.com/Battle-Kursk-David-M-Glantz/dp/0700613358), he recounts the opening moves of Army Detachment Kempf which involved a night road march of a German column led by the captured T-34s. In the darkness, they passed multiple Soviet checkpoints fooling the defenders, at least for a little while. Your first link describes captured Soviet T-34’s being used by the German army, but it seems they went to great lengths to make them recognizable as German to avoid friendly fire. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/29 "2010-03-22T15:17:56Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > What are the rules for submarines? Do they have to surface and fly colors before releasing a torpedo? No, but this has been a repeated concern regarding the practice of [unrestricted submarine warfare](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrestricted_submarine_warfare), in which submarines sink merchant vessels without warning. Some people have argued that the use of submarines in such a manner is contrary to the [Laws of War](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war) and that submarine crews should be tried as war criminals. The fundamental problem is that submarines are simply unable to follow the protocols of the traditional [Prize Rules](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prize_rules), in which the crews of merchant vessels are first captured and safeguarded prior to capturing or sinking a vessel. Submarines do not have room for prisoners, and lose most of their inherent advantages if they first announce their presence prior to attacking. If the merchant vessel were armed, or merely equipped with a radio, the submarine would risk its own destruction if it first announced its presence prior to attacking. These issues have been tacitly acknowledged by the various nations deploying submarines, including the United States. In the WWII Pacific campaign, for instance, the U.S. engaged in unrestricted submarine warfare against Japanese merchant vessels from the outset, a practice that was a major contributing factor to winning the war. In the modern age, the old prize rules have become even more obsolete by the deployment of long-range over-the-horizon anti-ship missiles. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Excellent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f19dbf/32.png) [@Mr.Excellent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Excellent)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/30 "2010-03-22T15:30:29Z")
> [@Mogle](#): > > To add even more, at first the Kormoran tried to evade but when that failed(because the Sydney was the faster ship) the Germans tried to convince the Sydney that they really were harmless Dutch merchants. What ultimately blew their cover was the Sydney’s request for their secret sign, something the Kormoran didn’t have. Wait - HMS Sydney encountered a slower, smaller ship actively attempting evasion, and whose identity they genuinely doubted? Why in the world did they allow Kormoran close enough to shred them? ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/31 "2010-03-22T18:36:19Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > So in the Hornblower books what was the dispute about the tactic’s legality that led the French to order him tried? In the novel, I believe Napoleon & Co. just wanted an excuse ti execute Hornblower. That is why Hornblower, Bush and Brown escape rather than wait to be exchanged. ---
**Author:** ![penultima\_thule](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/penultima_thule/32/3833_2.png) [@penultima\_thule](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/penultima_thule)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/32 "2010-03-22T21:29:15Z")
> [@Mr.Excellent](#): > > Wait - HMS Sydney encountered a slower, smaller ship actively attempting evasion, and whose identity they genuinely doubted? Why in the world did they allow Kormoran close enough to shred them? HM **A** S Sydney was lost with all (645) hands, so nobody knows. The choice seems to boil down to a monumental stuff-up of procedures by Sydney or a devious conspiracy by Kormoran. In the choice between a stuff-up and a conspiracy, pick the stuff-up every time. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2010, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/33 "2010-03-25T13:18:08Z")
> [@penultima\_thule](#): > > The choice seems to boil down to a monumental stuff-up of procedures by Sydney or a devious conspiracy by Kormoran. > > In the choice between a stuff-up and a conspiracy, pick the stuff-up every time. [Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor) This applies to most conspiracy theories… ---
**Author:** ![Damfino](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Damfino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damfino)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2010, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/34 "2010-03-25T20:26:34Z")
> [@Shakester](#): > > It was not uncommon in Nelson’s time (Hornblower being loosely based on Nelson). False flags were lowered and the true colours raised just as the guns were about to fire, so it was legal, and both sides did it. Yes, I think both the Hornblower and Aubrey/Maturin books describe the raising of the true colours before opening fire. Also came in to note that Hornblower was not only based on Nelson, but also Joseph Needham Tayler and Thomas Cochrane, according to the [Wikipedia site](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horatio_Hornblower). Quite a legacy. Aubrey too was, I believe based on Lord Cochrane’s career. ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2010, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980/35 "2010-03-25T23:58:59Z")
> [@Mr.Excellent](#): > > Wait - HMS Sydney encountered a slower, smaller ship actively attempting evasion, and whose identity they genuinely doubted? Why in the world did they allow Kormoran close enough to shred them? This is the big question, and as all hands were lost no-one known exactly why the captain of the **Sydney** was so … unwise … as to allow the **Kormoran** so close as to negate the **Sydney** ’s range advantage. By the account in the [Wikipedia entry](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_between_HMAS_Sydney_and_German_auxiliary_cruiser_Kormoran#Identification) the **Sydney** certainly dicked around for an excessive period, 90 minutes, attempting to ascertain the ship’s true identity, despite a number of suspicious silences and inappropriate responses. The **Sydney** was actively approaching the **Kormoran** during that period (perhaps to get clearer views of the “merchant’s” flags and signal lamps) to virtual point-blank range of around 1,000 yards (1,100 metres), which in the circumstances (ie that a German merchant raider using disguise was known to be active in the area) almost defies belief. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hornblower-gambit-could-you-get-away-with-this/532980.md?page=1)