Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

T3, R1, Prng 110: Admiral Class (Britain) vs Siegfried Class (Germany)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • T3, R1, Prng 110: Admiral Class (Britain) vs Siegfried Class (Germany)

    In your opinion, which of these two warship types was most significant, influential and/or effective?
    Feel free to apply those criteria as you please, along with any others you think appropriate.
    Note: Suggestions for some additional criteria are at the foot of this post.

    According to the criteria as you see and apply them, please vote for your preferred candidate in the attached poll.
    If your chosen criteria are significantly different from those suggested, telling us what they are and why you used them would be helpful.





    105: Admiral Class

    The six British Admiral-class battleships of the 1880s followed the pattern of the Devastation class in having their main armament on centerline mounts fore and aft of the superstructure. They were known as the Admiral class because they were named after British admirals. They were HMS Collingwood, Benbow, Rodney, Anson, Howe and Camperdown and were commissioned between July 1887 and July 1889. Their armor protection was as follows (representative of class):

    Waterline belt - 18in (457mm) tapering to 8in (203mm)
    Bulkheads – 16in (406mm) – 7in (178mm)
    Barbettes – 11.5in (292mm) – 10in (254mm)
    Conning tower – 12in (305mm) – 2in (51mm)
    Deck – 3-2in (76-51mm)

    Collingwood
    Posted to Mediterranean, serving November 1889 to March 1897. Coastguard ship at Bantry from March 1897–June 1903, when she paid off into the reserve, where she remained until sold.

    Benbow
    Commenced in Mediterranean Fleet, serving until October 1891. In Reserve until March 1894, with two short commissions to take part in manoevres. Until April 1904 she served as guardship at Greenock, and thereafter remained in Reserve until sold in 1909.

    Rodney
    Commissioned into Home Fleet. In reserve until July 1889, taking part in manoevres until September. Served with Channel Fleet until May 1894. Posted to Mediterranean, remaining until 1897. Thereafter, coastguard ship at Queensferry until February 1901. In reserve until sold in 1909.

    Anson
    Commissioned 28 May 1889 as flagship of Channel Fleet. On 17 March 1891 passenger steamer SS Utopia collided with stationary Anson in the Bay of Gibraltar. 562 of Utopia's passengers and crew and two rescuers from another British ship were killed. Anson did not report any injuries or damage. September 1893, Anson transferred to Mediterranean, serving until January 1900 with a refit at Malta in 1896. Returned home and paid off at Devonport January 1901, re-commissioning for the newly formed Home Fleet in March of same year. May 1904, paid off into reserve, where she remained until sold on 13 July 1909.

    Howe
    Commissioned July 1889 to take part in fleet manoevres. Posted to Channel Fleet May 1890, and then to Mediterranean. 2 November 1892, grounded on Ferrol Rock and salvaged with great difficulty, being finally freed 30 March 1893. After repairs & overhaul, served in Mediterranean until 1896. In 1901, relegated to reserve where she remained until sold in 1910.

    Camperdown
    Commissioned 18 July 1889. December 1889, posted to Mediterranean Fleet as flagship & remained until posted flagship of Channel Fleet May 1890. Paid off to Fleet reserve May 1892. Recommissioned July 1892 into Mediterranean Fleet. On 22 June 1893, collided with and sank battleship Victoria. 358 deaths, including Vice-Admiral Sir George Tryon. Early 1897, joined International Squadron, a multinational force that intervened in 1897-98 Greek Christian uprising against Ottoman Empire rule in Crete. Fired guns in anger for the first time during bombardments of the island. September 1899 into Category B reserve; May 1900 into Dockyard reserve. July 1900 commissioned as coast guard ship until May 1903. In reserve at Chatham until 1908. Employed as berthing ship for submarines until sold 1911.


    General characteristics* (*Representative. Some variation between ships)

    Displacement – 10,600 long tons (10,800t)
    Length – 330ft (101m)
    Beam – 68ft 6in (21m)
    Draft – 27ft 10in (8m)
    Power – Steam engines, twin screws, 7,500ihp (9,600-11,500 w/forced draft)
    Armament – 4 x 13.5in (343mm); 6 x BL 6in (152mm); 12 x 6pdr (57mm); 10 x 3pdr (47mm) QF + 5 x 14in (356mm) torpedo tubes.
    Complement – 530 officers & men


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Admiral-class_ironclad
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Collingwood_(1882)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Benbow_(1885)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Rodney_(1884)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Anson_(1886)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Howe_(1885)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Camperdown_(1885)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devastation-class_ironclad



    Anson, c 1897

    image_81983.jpg



    Howe at Queenstown Harbour, Co. Cork

    image_81987.jpg





    125: Siegfried Class

    The Siegfried class was a group of six coastal defense ships built by the German Kaiserliche Marine ("Imperial Navy") in the late 19th century. They were intended to protect the German coastline from naval attacks. The class comprised lead ship Siegfried, along with her sisters Beowulf, Frithjof, Heimdall, Hildebrand, and Hagen. All six were named after Norse mythological figures.

    The ships' armor consisted of compound steel for the first three ships and Krupp armor for the last three, coupled with teak. The upper section of the main armored belt was 240mm (9.4in) thick in the central portion of the ship and reduced to 180mm (7.1in) at either end. This was mounted on 330mm (13in) of timber. The lower section of the belt was 140mm (5.5in) thick in the central area and 100mm (3.9in) at the bow and stern. This portion of the armored belt was mounted on 290mm (11in) of timber. The main armored deck was 30mm (1.2in) thick, though on Hagen and Heimdall this was increased to 50mm (2in). The conning tower had a roof 30mm (1.2in) thick and sides 80mm (3.1in) thick. The armor protection on the conning tower sides was also increased on Hagen and Heimdall, to 160mm (6.3in).

    The class used transverse and longitudinal steel frames in the hull. They had eight watertight compartments and a double bottom that ran for 60% of the hull. The ships were described as good sea boats; having gentle motion and very good response to commands from the helm. They lost significant speed in heavy seas, however. They were powered by two sets of 3-cylinder triple-expansion engines, each in its own engine room. This was the first use of triple-expansion machinery in a major German warship. All six vessels had similar maximum speeds, with Beowulf the fastest at 15.1 knots (28.0 km/h; 17.4 mph) and Heimdall the slowest at 14.6 knots (27.0 km/h; 16.8 mph). Each ship had three electric generators that provided between 29–26 kilowatts at 67 volts.

    The Siegfrieds stored up to 220t (220 long tons; 240 short tons) of coal and 220 t (220 long tons; 240 short tons) of fuel oil, which enabled a range of 1,490 nautical miles (2,760 km; 1,710 mi) at a cruising speed of 10 knots (19 km/h; 12 mph). At 14 knots (26 km/h; 16 mph), the ships could only steam 740 nmi (1,370 km; 850 mi). With the refit, fuel bunkerage was more than doubled, to 580t (570 long tons; 640 short tons) of coal and 500t (490 long tons; 550 short tons) of oil. This dramatically increased the sailing range.

    Primary armament consisted of three 24cm K L/35 guns. In an arrangement very unusual for such large guns, two were mounted in a pair of MPL C/88 turrets forward side-by-side, while the third was mounted in a single turret aft. The guns could train 150 degrees to either side of the center line, depress to −4 degrees and elevate to 25 degrees. This enabled a maximum range of 13,000m (43,000 ft).

    All six vessels were heavily rebuilt, each undergoing refits at various times between 1898 and 1904. During the rebuilds, they were lengthened to 84.8m (278ft 3in) at the waterline and 86.13m (282ft 7in) overall. Their beams were unchanged but their draft was slightly decreased, to 5.45m (17ft 11in) forward and 5.47m (17ft 11in) aft.

    The Siegfried class saw only limited service in their intended roles. Revolutions in capital ship building in the first decade of the 20th century rapidly made them obsolete. As new battleships were intended for offensive operations, the Siegfried class was still retained for coast defense duties. They served in this capacity into the first year of World War I, being withdrawn from active service in 1915. Afterwards, all six served in a variety of secondary roles, primarily as barracks ships. All were struck from the naval register on 17 June 1919, shortly before the Treaty of Versailles, which ended the First World War, was signed.


    General characteristics (as built)

    Displacement – 3,500 metric tons (3,445 long tons)
    Length – 76.4m (250ft 8in) waterline; 79m (259ft 2in) overall
    Beam – 14.9m (48ft 11in)
    Draft – 5.51m (18ft 1in) forward; 5.74m (18ft 10in) aft
    Power – 2 triple-expansion steam engines, 2 shafts, 8 boilers
    Armament – 3 x 24cm (9.4in); 8 x 8.8cm (3.5in) + 4 x 35cm (13.8in) torpedo tubes
    Complement – 276 officers and men


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siegfr...l_defense_ship
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Siegfried
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Beowulf
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Frithjof
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Heimdall
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Hildebrand
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Hagen



    Hildebrand or possibly Beowulf

    image_81985.jpg



    Nice picture of Siegfried

    image_81986.jpg




    British Admiral class vs German Siegfried class.
    Easy decision or not?



    14
    Admiral Class ironclad battleship
    78.57%
    11
    Siegfried Class armored coastal defence/battleship
    21.43%
    3
    Last edited by panther3485; 18 Sep 19, 08:11.
    "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

  • #2
    I'm voting for the Admiral class due to my concerns over the limitations of coastal vessels, despite the reputation of Germany for building effective vessels.

    Overall, the Admiral class appears to be more heavily armored, ad possibly even more effectively armed. That dual turret arrangement on the German vessels is fine when charging directly at an enemy, but not effective for much else, and if both those bow turrets are firing together I'm curious what that does to the ship itself. I'm not a fan of mixed fuels, either. One or the other, preferably fuel oil, is far more efficient.

    Finally, in my mind, a "capitol ship" should be able to project power anywhere needed and not be limited to inshore defense.
    Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

    Comment


    • #3
      Great contest!
      this choice was harder than I thought...the Siegfried class introduced triple expansion steam engines, Krupp armour, and armoured turrets , along with minimal upper works to the Kaisermarine.

      OTOH, it was a ramming capable craft with turrets designed for the ramming attack. an outdated concept in 1880's.
      Perhaps if the ships were named Siegfried, Sigmund, Siglinde and Brunhild I would have voted for it....
      The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
        I'm voting for the Admiral class due to my concerns over the limitations of coastal vessels, despite the reputation of Germany for building effective vessels.

        Overall, the Admiral class appears to be more heavily armored, ad possibly even more effectively armed. That dual turret arrangement on the German vessels is fine when charging directly at an enemy, but not effective for much else, and if both those bow turrets are firing together I'm curious what that does to the ship itself. I'm not a fan of mixed fuels, either. One or the other, preferably fuel oil, is far more efficient.

        Finally, in my mind, a "capitol ship" should be able to project power anywhere needed and not be limited to inshore defense.
        Exactly so.

        The role of a Battlehip is power projection on a world-wide basis- always assuming that fuel is available- rather than sitting and waiting for a enemy who may never arrive. If only coastal protection is required then that aim can be best be provided for by shore batteries.
        "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
        Samuel Johnson.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by BELGRAVE View Post

          Exactly so.

          The role of a Battlehip is power projection on a world-wide basis- always assuming that fuel is available- rather than sitting and waiting for a enemy who may never arrive. If only coastal protection is required then that aim can be best be provided for by shore batteries.
          Good point, heck of a great contest, Panther!
          The Siegfried ships were a response to the extensive shallows at the mouth of the Kiel canal, the Baltic, and the waters around Helgoland, their primary roaming grounds .the concept was to drive off enemy battleships from the roadways of the great German north sea anchorages, and to combat any Danish allied vessels. \since they were retired during peacetime, we don't know if the idea would work.

          During the \Franco Prussian war, the French effectively blockaded the North sea.
          The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

          Comment


          • #6
            I find it interesting that the Siegfried class was pulled from the naval registry just before the Versailles treaty. Were the huns trying to hide them for later maybe?
            ARRRR! International Talk Like A Pirate Day - September 19th
            IN MARE IN COELO

            Comment


            • #7

              Admiral class by a fair margin here, IMO.
              "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

              Comment

              Latest Topics

              Collapse

              Working...
              X