Prev: Re: [GZG] Cruisers and Destroyers in the FT world Next: Re: Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding

Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding

From: "K.H.Ranitzsch" <kh.ranitzsch@t...>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 07:26:51 +0100
Subject: Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding

John Atkinson schrieb:
> On 1/16/06, laserlight <laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>>>Of course, what throws the math off is that you'd never
>>>find an SDN running around by itself.
>>
>>Bismarck? I concur, more or less, with the rest of John's
>>post.
> 
> 
> She left port and linked up with the Prinz Eugene (a heavy cruiser)
> and 3 destroyers, but the destroyers were detached after the stop in
> Norway and were sent to Trondheim.  I cannot locate a reason why this
> happened.  

I suspect it was because the destroyers did not have the range for the 
extended operations planned for the Bismarck.

There were quite a number of instances where capital ships operated as 
single vessels or at most in pairs, with a very light escort of other 
vessels.

In WWI, the Goeben in the Mediterranean comes to mind, with a single 
light cruiser escort.

The battles of the Colonels and the Falklands were fought on the German 
side by 2 heavy and 2 light cruisers.

The Graf Spee in WWII is another example. Various German operations 
against Arctic convoys also were by single capital ships, though these 
were usually escorted.

Various Third World Navies, especially in South America, did not have 
more than one or two Capital Ships.

So there are enough examples of operations by a small force including no

more than one big ship plus some escorts. Typically these old be because

either the navy could not afford more ships or because the theater was 
of minor importance and the bulk of the fleet was needed elsewhere.

Greetings
Karl Heinz

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

Prev: Re: [GZG] Cruisers and Destroyers in the FT world Next: Re: Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding