A sample scenario: Tirpitz versus South Dakota type BB

Tirpitz versus a US slow battleship

In putting a slow US battleship (i.e. a N. Carolina or S. Dakota class) against the Tirpitz we will make a scenario that occurs in the mid-North Atlantic. Weather would be overcast with a sea state of between 3 and 5 or moderately rough. Visibility would be well less than 20,000 yards and, to give a slight balance to the scenario it is daytime.
The pre-battle opens with the US ship detecting the Tirpitz on her SG surface search radar at about 80,000 yards. The Tirpitz, having no search radar and, following German Naval doctrine is not radiating any radars at this point. But, the Tirpitz may have detected the US presence using ESM systems like Naxos, or Samos.
If the later is the case, then the Germans have the choice of either using their superior speed to flee the engagement or to close on the contact and engage. In either case, the Tirpitz would not be aware of the type of ship she was engaging at this point as SG is common to most US Naval vessels.
For our scenario the Tirpitz is, of course, assumed to close or, the US battleship is able to do the same. The US ship at a range of 50,000 yards begins to acquire the Tirpitz on their Mk 8 fire control radar operating in main sweep mode. This would not be a give away as the Tirpitz’ ESM gear is sufficiently indiscriminate to distinguish between the various radar signals being received. At about 40,000 yards the US switches to precision sweep mode to obtain a firing solution on the Mk 8. From this point the US battleship continues to maneuver and close to obtain a firing position at a range of about 35,000 yards.
At 35,000 yards the US ship opens fire. Given that the Mk 8 is accurate to + or - 30 yards and 1/10th degree at this range the first salvo is likely a straddle. By the third to fifth salvo some hits are obtained on Tirpitz. Tirpitz is unlikely at this point to be able to return accurate fire as neither her FuMo 26 or 30 Hohentweil radar or optical fire control systems are accurate enough or have sufficient range to resolve a firing solution on the US ship. Given our historical data the Tirpitz will have taken between one and three hits at this point. Let us assume the later. Given this condition, the Tirpitz is likely to have lost sufficient speed to now be unable to escape due to flooding, either local or general, and primary fire control is likely degraded and local control of all or part of the main battery is in effect. Additional possible system losses could be one or more main battery turrets or some part of the propulsion system in addition to local or general flooding of some spaces.
In a late war (1944) scenario, the US has the additional option of jamming the Tirpitz’ radar systems using TDY, APT 1 - 4 and / or, chaff fired from 5" guns. The Germans in this scenario are simply out classed in sensor performance to such a degree that the only way they can approach parity with a modern US battleship is to have a great degree of luck like the case of the S. Dakota at Savo Island where self-inflicted damage degraded the ship’s sensor systems prior to the action.

 

You are leaving out a few items. Both battleships carry on board aircraft and can launch by cataput. And both battleships would be operating with aux. ships such as destroyers or crusiers. Also both ships have optical range finders.

I don't know too much about battleships but it would also depend on their armor. The HMS Hood was supposed to be strong but it was hit in a week spot and I think only 3 crewmen survived the explosion.

Anouther factor is the fuel state of each ship and their excorts and anouther factor would be the rules of engagement for each battleship. Hitler did not want to fight his battleships after losing the one in South America ( Graf Spay ? ) and the Bismark and he did not complete the aircraft carrier that was started. Perhaps their orders were to attack convoys and avoid fights with heavy armed ships.

One last thought that may be a factor is that US Battle Ships usually just were used to shell shore installations prior to an invasion. A moving target that shoots back at you may be alot more difficult to attack.

 

Graf Spee...

The Tirpitz seeing the likelihood of a dragout..allout fight the Tirpitz would probably make a run for Norway most likely to get under a fight/fighter-bomber umbrella for safety seeing as how Hitler more than likely like TA pointed out didn't have a great deal of resources in the "Big" category especially after the sinking of the Bismarck.

Besides by 1944 the South Dakota wouldn't have been by herself...your looking at the U.S.S. Massachusetts, U.S.S. Mississippi, U.S.S. Texas, U.S.S. New York...etc.. in the Atlantic possibly. However, in my opinion the Tirpitz should be glad the U.S.S. North Carolina didn't come up against her, I believe the Tirpitz would probably have been out-classed BIG TIME against the veteran U.S.S. North Carolina crew in any case the Japs claimed to have sunk her six times and look shes still in Wilmington, NC. to this day!

Regards,
MARNE

 

Graf Spee...</font>[/QUOTE]Isn't that the name for a horse?

T.A., I wasn't expecting US radars at the time to be so capable, able to provide fire solutions at such range. Wouldn't these be able to be countered by slight zig-zaging?

 

I seem to have left only implied several items within this scenario that appear to need clarification.

While these battleships carry seaplanes for spotting, the sea state would prevent their use as recovery would not be possible in this scenario. Second, these aircraft were rarely, if ever, actually used in surface actions for spotting the fall of shot. In the US case, it became a common practice in many surface actions to jettison the aircraft overboard at first chance to prevent their becoming a fire hazard during the engagement.
Crew quality was left aside from the scenario deliberately. The concept of it was a Tirpitz-type battleship versus a US slow Washington Treaty battleship like South Dakota not necessarily those exact ships. The comparison being made was one of design concept and technical characteristics.

On the Mk 3 / 8 fire control radars: These were extremely innovative designs. They incorporated an early version of phased array using mechanical rastering of the beam to obtain what was one of the first Track-while-scan radar systems. In either sweep or precision sweep mode it would have been an absolute breeze for the operator to follow a maneuvering surface target. The only way that could easily fool the radar was when two targets were sufficently close togeather that their returns blended and could not be seperated.
If you look at the displays as shown in Naval Ordinance manuals of the period it is obvious that this radar was as accurate, or moreso, than any optical rangefinder could be. At 30,000 yards it is about 10 times as accurate as the standard US battleship optical rangefinder (resolution at that distance is about 280 yards...note accuracy varies with range). Is it any wonder radar took the place of optics?

 

<The HMS Hood was supposed to be strong but it was hit in a week spot and I think only 3 crewmen survived the explosion.>

I had always thought the Hood was lightly armored, sacrificing weight for speed.

 

Would you comment this guy's system of scoring battleships ?

http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm#categories

I don't think they kept the planes all through the war because sailors liked pilots.

In old film footage I always saw a ship make a circle and the float plane landed in the calm area that the ship made inside the wake of the circle.

"I seem to have left only implied several items within this scenario that appear to need clarification." You sound like George W running the Iraq war.

 

Spee means Spray in German I once heard me uncle say, that may explain the 'spay' entrance. Dunno if he was right.

& as far as the battle goes, it is impossible to determine where shells land, the Hood sinking was what some might call a lucky shot, I'd call it a fortunate one. Like a street fight, the winner is usually the 1st one to land a good shot, which is in this case impossible to determine.

 

The range is the decisive factor naturally as well as accuracy but if I was in charge of Tirpitz and realized I could not match the distance I´d take evasive action immediately instead of fighting back.

 

The scoring is realtively basic. I would have a difference of opinion on some of the items as scored.

As for pilots on ships sailors kept them around because sheep would be to obvious!

 

Thanks Chrome That sounds good to me !!! But really I think is was the name of an admiral.

 

Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrggggggggghhhh! This is a family forum! (Well, I heard it was)

 

It is a family forum, disfunctional family.