Alternative I-class BCs

martin worsey

Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2010
Messages
115
Reaction score
1
Location
ripley
Country
ll
I have a few examples of the amount of space available on British warships and they were certainly not cruise liners. People in the early twentieth century were accustomed to hardship and overcrowding but life on board a British ship would have been tough. As the German warships were much worse in terms of space and sanitation was reportedly primitive, conditions would no doubt have been unbelievably difficult by modern terms; presumably, overcrowding and poor sanitation would be a recipe for the spread of diseases.
With respect to the performance of the German Battlecruisers, accounts of the Goeben in the Mediterranean in 1914 would suggest that she was unable to make much over 20 kts due to boiler problems and issues with poor coal. For balance however, accounts of Invincible at the Falklands would indicate that the amounts of smoke she was generating and the vibrations that occurred at 25kts largely precluded effective shooting.
In addition to the freeboard mentioned, the lighter hulls in German capital ships relate to the use of much thinner plates; in the Badens, the bottom skin was only 5/8” thick as opposed to the 1” plate in similar British ships. In addition to the issue of stressing, the thinner plates necessitated more elaborate riveting and scarphing which contributed to both cost and build times. I would suggest that the lightening of hulls was not especially successful when considering the additional cost and displacement associated with the large secondary battery. This was at best almost useless in combat and at worst a distraction to the aiming of the main guns and a potential source of danger that risked the destruction of the ships.
Overall, I think it is fair to say that ships of all nations were poorly designed with the benefit of hindsight but were phenomenal achievements by the standards of the day.
 

JAG88

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
65
Reaction score
1
Location
Santiago
Country
llChile
Ive read the piece, that level of forcing might get you 26 knts on trials in the bath but the VdT never was able to sustain those speeds on operations whilst the Invicible had no trouble, the Moltke you will notice could only also could only make 23 knts did it have damage also? The Invincible was the quicker ship in service. Anything by Tirpitz is a pretty good source :)
Campbell talks about the revolutions required to drive VdT at 26kn, therefore, such a speed was attainable for the ship if undamaged.

Regarding Moltke, did you read Campbell?

"As a result of these hits the Moltke listed 3° to starboard which was corrected by counter-flooding the port wings. After this had been done, about 1000 tons of water were present in the ship with an increase in draught of 2ft 6in aft and a decrease of 8in forward, but the Moltke was able to maintain 25kts to the end."

So, yes.

Regarding service speed, Goeben (even with boiler damage) might disagree with you.

Could you quote Tripitz saying that the HSF was a coastal force or had coastal ships as you stated?

Regarding habitability, I remember reading in an old magazine that the KM actually had good accomodations for the crew having even heating and individual lockers, but when mobilized that changed due to the extra conscripted personnel.

Extra stokers maybe?
 

barkhauer

Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2008
Messages
356
Reaction score
2
Location
Ohio
Extra stokers maybe?
I always assumed naval vessels had a crewing "ripple effect." Add 100 stokers, and you need to add 10 cooks. Add those 110 men, and you need another quartermaster, another barber, doctor, 3 or 4 officers to run things, etc. So it's considerably more than just stokers. This is coming from a guy who is medically disqualified from military service, though.
 

saddletank

Forum Conscript
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
3
Location
UK
Country
ll
Regarding the Goeben in 1914, when the two I class fell in with her off Cape Bon on 6th August when there was 24 or 48 hours still to expire on Britain's ultimatum to Germany to withdraw from Belgium, the British ships were ordered to maintain contact with the German battle cruiser. Notwithstanding every effort made by the two British ships Goeben and Breslau steadily pulled away until by dusk they had vanished many miles ahead.

A great deal it would seem depends on the conditions of the hull and engines, the quality of coal and the tiredness of the stokers but even so, on that occasion in a calm sea the two British ships were reportedly almost making 25 knots (but not in fact reaching 25 knots) Goeben pulled ahead over the course of several hours with some ease, indicating a speed well in excess of 25 knots and possibly in excess of 26.

That Goeben was faster than the I class is hardly in dispute anywhere to my knowledge.

At the Dogger Bank in Jan 1915 Blucher was making 24 knots and falling astern before she was hit. In the after battle considerations Von Pohl (or was in Von Ingenhol by then?) ordered that in future the scouting forces would only operate with homogeneous ships. There was nothing about Blucher that was not homogeneous with the rest of Hipper's squadron with respect to that particular chase action except that she was slower. She was lost because she could not keep up. In this action also the I Class fell well astern, again in a calm sea. This episode is further evidence that Moltke was capable of speeds in excess of 25 knots or at the very least was faster than the I Class.

I'm not sure what other historical examples are needed to prove that the I Class were slower than the Moltke class.
 
Last edited:

Coypus

Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
393
Reaction score
1
Location
Belfast
Country
ll
The Geoben was steaming at 24 knts the RN ships had been on extended service with engines in need of an overhaul and had heavily fouled bottoms and a lack of personel specifically stokers and kept up for six hours, source Castles of Steel page 35. The I class were roughly of a simmilair speed to the Moltke but faster operationally than VdT. The Blutchers maximum at Dogger was 23 knts, castles of steel page 384. Not to troll but there are my historical examples
 

JAG88

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
65
Reaction score
1
Location
Santiago
Country
llChile
KM accommodations

Found it, Warship Profile N°37, 1973.

http://i376.photobucket.com/albums/oo208/jag888/photos1/Konig/Knig-pp2.jpg

http://i376.photobucket.com/albums/oo208/jag888/photos1/Konig/Knig-pp3.jpg

It refers to the Königs only (that is what you get by making statements without your sources at hand) but it should give us an idea of how things were.

I recall delcyros saying that the KM accommodations were not as bad as thought to be but... I don't trust my memory that much today.

Thx for the data Martin. I think that the heavier secondary battery was eventually vindicated (by mere accident) when it was realized that a heavier anti-torpedo boat battery was needed. But I do think that the original logic behind it was flawed.

Greetings.
 
Last edited:

Coypus

Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
393
Reaction score
1
Location
Belfast
Country
ll
Re: KM accommodations

Impressive ideas in the Konig but when you read the passage it does say that for mobilization the compliment increased by a third and resulted in "severe crowding and all its concomtatant ills" which bears out what people are saying parts of German crews were billeted ashore because there were not the room on ship. The GF and USN had to be ready to steam at a moments notice so they had to fit all their crews on board maybe without some of those refinements but battle ready.
 

saddletank

Forum Conscript
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
3
Location
UK
Country
ll
Re: KM accommodations

I'm never certain where these discussions about the fitness of KM ships to have capacity for their crews is heading. The ships were designed for operations close to home and in that capacity were excellent warships, clearly the designers intended to compromise crew comfort in order to improve defensive measures in the knowledge that the crews would only be at sea for a few days at most.

In that regard there is no discussion to have. Ships were built to do a certain job and did them extremely well. It isn't like Tirpitz or the Kaiser ever planned to send some out to raid in the Atlantic or anything, such an operation was never considered and was far outside the KM's and German's policies in WWI.
 

Bullethead

Storm Eagle Studios
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
3,890
Reaction score
3
Location
Wakefield, LA
Country
llUnited States
So the answer is we don't know. Not that I'm being critical, but actually we do not know if she sailed with a full war complement or fewer men.

On the other hand I'm unsure what asking that question is trying to draw out. I'm confident RN ships also bumbled about the globe in peacetime with fewer crew than a wartime complement.
The impression I get from the relatively few mentions on this subject, and also in my own experience, is that units (ships included) are much more likely to be short-handed at home. The idea is, if sabres start rattling, they can easily top up with reservists, new recruits, shore personnel, etc. But this isn't possible overseas, so ships and ground units going on extended deployment are brought up to strength before they leave. I think this was especially true in the timeframe of 100 years ago and earlier, when a fair number of hands were expected to die during any deployment due to disease, accident, etc.

Barring definitive info on VdT, I guess the next best source would be the manning of von Spee's and Souchon's ships in the summer of 1914. Anybody got that handy?

Anyway, the existence of these German squadrons seems to show that German ships were used as raiders far from home :).
 

saddletank

Forum Conscript
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
3
Location
UK
Country
ll
I'm thinking that cruisers is a different discussion to main battle wagons. Given that von Spee was out in the Far East for I think a year or two before the war, it would seem quite obvious that Scahrnhorst and Gneisenau and the various light cruisers did not present any overcrowding or sanitation issues to their full complement of crews. Its not meaningful to compare such ships to Von der Tann or any other battle cruiser of battleship I don't think.
 

Coypus

Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
393
Reaction score
1
Location
Belfast
Country
ll
The Asiactic squadron had a crew relief shortly before the outbreak of war @1500 men though plenty of old hands still stayed, once war became imminent reservists from all over Asia started arriving in Tsingtao. Crews of Chinese river gunboats and various ships unfit for combat were added to the pool Emden recieved 40 sailors and 25 other hands including an army doctor this was probably to supplement the loss of the prize crew put aboard Rajasan which was turned into a raider named Comoran so my reading is there was no shortage of hands in the Asiactic squadron if they could fit out a raider. (Last Gentleman of War pages 1-40)
 

Bullethead

Storm Eagle Studios
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
3,890
Reaction score
3
Location
Wakefield, LA
Country
llUnited States
I'm thinking that cruisers is a different discussion to main battle wagons. Given that von Spee was out in the Far East for I think a year or two before the war, it would seem quite obvious that Scahrnhorst and Gneisenau and the various light cruisers did not present any overcrowding or sanitation issues to their full complement of crews. Its not meaningful to compare such ships to Von der Tann or any other battle cruiser of battleship I don't think.
That's why I mentioned Souchon. He had Goeben, you know ;).
 

saddletank

Forum Conscript
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
3
Location
UK
Country
ll
I'd class Goeben's operations as short range, as in the HSF. She never went far from a major port. I still see no valuable comparison data.
 

JAG88

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
65
Reaction score
1
Location
Santiago
Country
llChile
Re: KM accommodations

I'm never certain where these discussions about the fitness of KM ships to have capacity for their crews is heading. The ships were designed for operations close to home and in that capacity were excellent warships, clearly the designers intended to compromise crew comfort in order to improve defensive measures in the knowledge that the crews would only be at sea for a few days at most.

In that regard there is no discussion to have. Ships were built to do a certain job and did them extremely well. It isn't like Tirpitz or the Kaiser ever planned to send some out to raid in the Atlantic or anything, such an operation was never considered and was far outside the KM's and German's policies in WWI.
Indeed, I just wanted to provide some additional information to the discussion, the Ks appear to have very good facilities even having features that were missing in RN ships, for example and, on the other hand, I also wanted to know if anyone knew why those ships shipped extra personnel once mobilized. Was it by design and intended from the beggining? Was there a change in operational doctrine that required additional personnel? Were they stokers, damage control personnel, landing parties, oarsmen...

I recall Bullethead mentioning that the larger crews in KM ships were a factor in the damage control model so, I was wondering if that was why the KM beefed up their crews for operations that were clearly intended to last for a couple days only. Also, those ships moved on stoker muscle rather than coal, perhaps they wanted the extra numbers to ensure they could sustain their best speed for a longer time? It would be wise when you expect to be outnumbered.
 

Bullethead

Storm Eagle Studios
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
3,890
Reaction score
3
Location
Wakefield, LA
Country
llUnited States
I'd class Goeben's operations as short range, as in the HSF. She never went far from a major port. I still see no valuable comparison data.
I dunno.... Germany had no bases of her own in the Med. In the event of war between the most likely adversaries of the day, and given Italy's growing cold feet towards the Triple Alliance, I think it likely that the Germans would have dispatched Souchon with the idea of him only being able to count on Habsburg bases in a worst-case scenario. Planning for war is part of all deployments--it's often the main reason for them--so I can't imagine the Germans not thinking of such a scenario.

So, Habsburg bases. Any additional wartime crewmen Goeben needed would have had to get there by train, more or less at right angles to the paths of the army's simultaneous mobilization trains. With the army owning the trains, I doubt the sailors could have gotten south in any reasonable time. And that's assuming the war started with Goeben up the Adriatic. If she got caught elsewhere, the Adriatic could have been shut to her. I figure the navy knew this and sent Goeben out with a full staff. But I don't know for sure. I hope somebody can dig something definitive up.

Prior to the balloon going up, of course, things would be much different. Goeben could go anywhere, at least for coal, fresh groceries, and brief liberty for part of the crew. But I doubt she'd have gotten much in the way of major dockyard work from non-Habsburg bases. While I'm sure the British at least would have LOVED to have cleared a drydock for her in the event of a major breakdown, for the same reason the Germans would have declined the offer.
 

Zakalwe

Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
665
Reaction score
1
Location
Ecktown, S-H, German
Country
llGermany
I can`t answer the question about the crews, but having read "Kleiner Kreuzer Dresden -Odyssee ohne Wiederkehr" from Maria Teresa Parker de Bassi (which unfortunatly is only available in German and Spanish, btw the backside of the book claims "Dresden" made the longest operation of a warship ever, I don`t know it this is true though) I would say the limiting factor is coal. In the South Atlantic, Dresden even had to make wood to add to the range. I recall once reading about the "White Fleet", some Atlantic based US BBs making a world tour which proved to be a logistical nightmare even at peacetime. For sure the Empire helped the RN, but in a "what-if" scenario without the Empire and many allies even the RN would have been in trouble operating fleets of the Big Boys on long range missions I guess.
 

Coypus

Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
393
Reaction score
1
Location
Belfast
Country
ll
The Geoben got workmen from Germany and tubes for her boiler when she was docked at Pola so I'm sure with all the machinations afoot any shortfall of crew could have been made up during her stay to the 29th.
 

saddletank

Forum Conscript
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
1,461
Reaction score
3
Location
UK
Country
ll
That was all part of the Victorian navy's far reaching arm - the fact Britain did have colonies and friendly allies all over the place enabling coaling pretty much anywhere her captains chose to seek a port.

EDIT: I tend to agree with Coypus that finding additional crews around the Med would have been easy for Souchon seeing as von Spee had little trouble on the other side of the globe. A sailor who can shovel coal is the same anywhere and Austrians would have sufficed if that's all that was available but I'm sure the extremely efficient German war machine could have sent sailors from Wilhelmshaven by rail if necessary. The fact that we lack any solid facts about this is pretty annoying!
 
Last edited:

delcyros

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
48
Reaction score
4
Location
kreuzberg
Country
llGermany
I have no idea why to compare MOLTKE with an I-class in speed. The I class just reached 26 kts under forced trials while MOLTKE clocked 28.4kts on hers. Heck, even BLÜCHER recorded an average 6 hours speed of 25.3 kts (25.823 kts max in the fastest of four runs).
In an episode mostly forgotten today, MOLTKE left Kiel on May 11, 1912, and in an unbroken journey arrived off of Hampton Roads, Virginia, on May 30, 1912. Along with the accompanying light cruisers STETTIN and BREMEN she then spent two weeks touring the US East coast, which included making port calls in Norfolk (where she paid honors to President Taft aboard the presidential yacht MAYFLOWER), New York, and Baltimore. MOLTKE departed Baltimore on June 13 and arrived back in Kiel on June 24
MOLTKE´s visit caused some consternation in the USN since the visit seemed to indicate that the Germans could now "rapidly strike across the Atlantic and attack the defences of the soon to be completed Panama Canal before the slower American battle fleet could respond." Consequently, MOLTKE was the subject of some interest by the Office of Naval Intelligence who noted that she had made the 3000 mile trip at a relatively quick 15 knots and had enough coal left to make the return trip. Thus even while she certainly have coaled along her way back, she demonstrated that this class was capable of deep bluewater cruise operations.
The sister ship GOEBEN was for a total of two years (since Nov. 1912) in service with the german mediterranean squadron before the outbreak of the war with it´s sailors "cramped" into the confined spaces aboard their ships (this is even worse in a CL than a BC) and could indeed operate for extended periods of time under such conditions. In fact, the German Naval High Command was so impressed with GOEBEN's performance in her "out-of-area" role that it had planned in the spring of 1914 to replace SCHARNHORST with MOLTKE as flagship of the East Asian Squadron. Chronic troubles with GOEBEN's boilers and engines, which were long overdue for an intense shipyard overhaul, led to the decision to swap out the two sister ships instead in the late summer of 1914 - but then war intervened to make the whole thing a moot point. Despite the POLA repairs, GOEBEN was in need of a complete engine overhaul but nevertheless was able to easily pull away from the I-class in a direct pursuit condition, depsite beeing short in men with a peacetime complement and beeing subject to careful engine management owing to condenser issues (this is noted in Souchon´s papers who complained that his ship was still short of men before arriving in the Empire).
The I´s were faster than GNEISENAU & SCHARNHORST, with all the benefit from preperations undertaken in advance to this operation while the ACR´s were in need of an overhaul but this could be expected from 25kts / 24 Kts respective maximum speed. The I-class INDOMITABLE was not able to fire on BLÜCHER at Doggerbank until BLÜCHER received damage and dropped down in speed to 17 kts, indicating that BLÜCHER was fast enough to keep the range with them. The NEW ZEALAND (improved I-class) was able at least to open fire on BLÜCHER after half an hour into the action.
This indicates that in direct engagement,
the I were faster than german ACR except for BLÜCHER, which could at least mainten the range for a while.
They were significantly slower than GOEBEN / MOLTKE anyway.
VON DER TANN was a fast ship, too. In her 6 hours continous steaming trial she averaged 27 kts and peaked 28.124 kts in her fastest run (heavily overpowered but the turbines could handle that steam manifold pressure for brief periods, not sure about the condensers, though), making VON DER TANN the fastest big ship at her time. VON DER TANN was always considered to be faster than the gunnery training ship of the fleet, which was BLÜCHER until her demise off Doggerbank.

I could give a synopsis on the trial conditions before and after the outbreak of ww1 but somethings tells me I will be happier to stay away from this.
 
Last edited:

JAG88

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
65
Reaction score
1
Location
Santiago
Country
llChile
No, please, by all means go ahead delcyros, the more detail the better! It is always illuminating to read more on the matter.

Thx in advance.
 
Top