A SAI Jutland AAR and turret armor philosophy in RTW and RL
Jan 7, 2019 5:10:42 GMT -6
bcoopactual likes this
Post by rimbecano on Jan 7, 2019 5:10:42 GMT -6
I did a playthrough of Jutland in SAI tonight, and the results demonstrate the weakness of a design philosophy that appears to have been pervasive for a while in real life, and that I have also seen people report using in RTW, namely, the use of an armor profile where turret face armor is thinner than the belt.
A brief AAR of the alt-Jutland action is as follows: once my (Britain's) scouting CLs contacted the German BC force, I sent 5th BS on an ESE course to get behind Hipper, while sending the BC line itself on a NE course to engage him and draw his attention. My BCs actually engaged him fairly late, his CLs were in earlier, more solid, and more constant contact with 1st BCS than they were with 5th BS, so even before the BC lines were in visual contact, I was able to use the movement of 1st BCS to steer him and lure him north. I soon had him cornered between the BCs and 5th BS, and maneuvered to hold him there until the Grand Fleet could arrive on scene. The cohesion of the German line broke up as they tried to find a way out and started facing torpedo attacks from two directions from the supporting elements of the BC and 5th BS forces, and as the Grand Fleet arrived Seydlitz was significantly further south than the rest of Hipper's force, but his destroyers and an attempt by his line to break out to the south had positioned 5th BS fairly far away from her, while my BC force was much closer to the other German BCs. I was nervous about my BCs engaging the German force at close range for too long, so I arranged for the leading elements of the Grand Fleet to press in just as close. The result was that the German BCs were engaged by most of the RN battle line at ranges that got, at times, to within 5000 yd. Von Der Tann was immobilized by having power knocked out, and within another few minutes took a penetrating hit to A turret and blew up.
I was worried about my own ships, especially the BCs, taking a golden BB at that range, and also worried about torpedoes, so I began opening the range, but other than Seydlitz, the German BCs were no longer in fighting condition: Lutzow lost mobility and took over a hundred heavy hits and 10(!) torpedoes as the whole Grand Fleet passed by her at the same ranges that its leading elements had, and Derflinger and Moltke were engaged less closely, but each ate 60+ heavy shells and a torpedo. Seydlitz was not engaged by the Grand Fleet or the BCs, which had closer targets, and remained under the combined fire of the whole 5th BS for a good chunk of the engagement. However, German destroyers remained an obstacle to the 5th BS engaging her closely, and she took only 24 hits and remained in fighting condition.
I was just beginning to consider engaging Seydlitz with the whole fleet when outlying CLs reported contacts traveling in line astern to the southeast. Within a few minutes, it was confirmed that this was the leading division of the High Seas Fleet. I did not want to risk British BCs against full German battleships, so I sent the BCs home, while having the 5th BS move to take the vanguard of the Grand Fleet. The two battle lines met with about two hours of daylight left, and the only occurrence of note in the ensuing textbook parallel slugging match was that HMS Orion took a German 11" shell to a turret and blew up. At nightfall, I opted to disengage, and that was the end of it.
This brings me to the issue of armor profile: 5 capital ships were lost, 4 German and 1 British. Of these, two were lost to turret fires. Von Der Tann probably was doomed anyways, as she was taking fire at very close range, but she only took 12 hits in the entire battle, half of what Seydlitz took, and right on the cusp between the ships that were reported as having "light" vs. "medium" damage in the battle report. Orion only took 7 hits, solidly in "light" damage territory, and, unlike VDT, would not have been in danger if immobilized, as she was engaged at long range and was part of a cohesive line of battle, which would have served to shelter her. Both ships' belts were thicker than their turret faces by about an inch, and it seems that shaving an inch off the belt would have allowed for significantly more armor on the turrets, which in Orion's case would likely have saved the ship, and in VDT's case would have allowed her to do more damage to the enemy, or at least would have made sinking her take more resources.
Does anyone know why this was done historically, or can anybody that uses such armor schemes in RTW say why they do so?
A brief AAR of the alt-Jutland action is as follows: once my (Britain's) scouting CLs contacted the German BC force, I sent 5th BS on an ESE course to get behind Hipper, while sending the BC line itself on a NE course to engage him and draw his attention. My BCs actually engaged him fairly late, his CLs were in earlier, more solid, and more constant contact with 1st BCS than they were with 5th BS, so even before the BC lines were in visual contact, I was able to use the movement of 1st BCS to steer him and lure him north. I soon had him cornered between the BCs and 5th BS, and maneuvered to hold him there until the Grand Fleet could arrive on scene. The cohesion of the German line broke up as they tried to find a way out and started facing torpedo attacks from two directions from the supporting elements of the BC and 5th BS forces, and as the Grand Fleet arrived Seydlitz was significantly further south than the rest of Hipper's force, but his destroyers and an attempt by his line to break out to the south had positioned 5th BS fairly far away from her, while my BC force was much closer to the other German BCs. I was nervous about my BCs engaging the German force at close range for too long, so I arranged for the leading elements of the Grand Fleet to press in just as close. The result was that the German BCs were engaged by most of the RN battle line at ranges that got, at times, to within 5000 yd. Von Der Tann was immobilized by having power knocked out, and within another few minutes took a penetrating hit to A turret and blew up.
I was worried about my own ships, especially the BCs, taking a golden BB at that range, and also worried about torpedoes, so I began opening the range, but other than Seydlitz, the German BCs were no longer in fighting condition: Lutzow lost mobility and took over a hundred heavy hits and 10(!) torpedoes as the whole Grand Fleet passed by her at the same ranges that its leading elements had, and Derflinger and Moltke were engaged less closely, but each ate 60+ heavy shells and a torpedo. Seydlitz was not engaged by the Grand Fleet or the BCs, which had closer targets, and remained under the combined fire of the whole 5th BS for a good chunk of the engagement. However, German destroyers remained an obstacle to the 5th BS engaging her closely, and she took only 24 hits and remained in fighting condition.
I was just beginning to consider engaging Seydlitz with the whole fleet when outlying CLs reported contacts traveling in line astern to the southeast. Within a few minutes, it was confirmed that this was the leading division of the High Seas Fleet. I did not want to risk British BCs against full German battleships, so I sent the BCs home, while having the 5th BS move to take the vanguard of the Grand Fleet. The two battle lines met with about two hours of daylight left, and the only occurrence of note in the ensuing textbook parallel slugging match was that HMS Orion took a German 11" shell to a turret and blew up. At nightfall, I opted to disengage, and that was the end of it.
This brings me to the issue of armor profile: 5 capital ships were lost, 4 German and 1 British. Of these, two were lost to turret fires. Von Der Tann probably was doomed anyways, as she was taking fire at very close range, but she only took 12 hits in the entire battle, half of what Seydlitz took, and right on the cusp between the ships that were reported as having "light" vs. "medium" damage in the battle report. Orion only took 7 hits, solidly in "light" damage territory, and, unlike VDT, would not have been in danger if immobilized, as she was engaged at long range and was part of a cohesive line of battle, which would have served to shelter her. Both ships' belts were thicker than their turret faces by about an inch, and it seems that shaving an inch off the belt would have allowed for significantly more armor on the turrets, which in Orion's case would likely have saved the ship, and in VDT's case would have allowed her to do more damage to the enemy, or at least would have made sinking her take more resources.
Does anyone know why this was done historically, or can anybody that uses such armor schemes in RTW say why they do so?