The Ship Model Forum

I freely admit that for a man with a lifetime of interest and study of naval history and warships, I am very unknowledgeable in the field of Gunnery Firecontrol. I mean mostly as it involves the primitive computing of a fire control solution in WWI, being able to take so many inputs and get a reasonable solution. So you bet, I can't wait to get ahold of this book.
The range finding and then spotting and correcting of shot is very straight forward stuff and easy to understand. So many factors to consider in how well a force of ships shoots in a particular situation. Smoke, Sun position and all that. In my Navy time, we used mechanical fire control computers. Amazing stuff all those internal workings. Glad I was ASW sonar technician, easier stuff that!
Please keep us informed when you hear the Paper Back edition is out. It's nice to have you around as an insider on the naval scene in Britain

Bob B.

Bob I'm waiting for the P/B then I'll send it to Dr John Brooks for him to sign a copy. I believe it has a foreword by Prof. Andrew Lambert who is someone I very much admire and I have a feeling he supervised Dr John Brooks PhD at Kings College London and this book may very well be some of that thesis published.

I have to say I was most impressed how he described the actions and abilities of fire-control on both sides. The Britisih side it seems has been poorly understood until now!

Sounds like a book a man should have! But wow! That is a price for a regular book. Imagine us poor Yanks having to convert that. I'de be paying $120 at least . I may wait on a purchase till they find out they can't sell many copies at that price. I've got all the standard Jutland books plus a couple German books translated into English. This new one sounds very imporatant to understanding the technical aspects of the battle. I have Marder's Jutland book with all the folding maps at the back, even so, how truely accurate are they? Germans also, did show great gunnery accuracy in other engagements. Like Sandinavian convoy attacks, Emden vs. Sydney, Falklands. etc. Not dreadnought gunnery though in those cases.

Bob B.

As the H/B is stupendously expensive, I'm going to wait for the P/B.

It seems the publisher it taking the p*^s!!!! with the price of £70 or so for a small A5 sized book with 320 pages!!!

Another thing which came to my mind which I talked about him with was as we know the general poor quality of AP shells for both sides at Jutland.

Also what occurred to me was why didn't Beatty open out the range once he formed his battle line he could then use the advantage of his heavier guns and also give time for the brand new 5th Battle Squadron to catch up with the B/C's.

Their 15ft rangefinders would have been far more crucial to helping improve the chances for the British than the 9ft ones on the B/C's.

I think Beatty was far too preoccupied with cutting off the South for the German battlecruisers, he didnt want a repeat of the Dogger Bank with them escaping to fight another day so this was why he held 23knts and held course SSE to cut off the chance of German B/C's running away from him. This also was a serious error of judgement!

Sounds like I really need this book!

As John Brooks explained it took him a long time just to piece the movements of Indefatigable together the battle seems hard to map as there was so much going on.

He was only concerned with the opposing initial B/C's in his presentation. Smoke seemed to cause all sorts of problems with the British ability to cope with the range changing constantly, Beatty was to blame for this with not forming his line in the right position to the prevailing wind. Also he seemed to drive his ships more than necessary at 23knts giving them uneccesary vibration which for the the early battlecruisers was their top speed and thus they were really very strained.

The Germans had no wind interference as the smoke for them was blown to the disengaged side. Also they tended only to approach the RN B/C's at 18knts thus having less vibration to deal with on their ships to affect the range taking.

But to simply say the German firecontrol was superior due to their stereoscopic fire control is far too simplistic. John Brooks goes into many reasons why the British firing was so poor and the number of hits being far lower than the Germans even though the RN had weight of numbers and generally larger guns.

Actually, that wouldn't be too hard!

I lust for reasonable maps of the battle. In addition, the USNI's reproduction of Campbell's illustrations is classic for them (very bad).

At this remove, with computers to correct the time and location errors where possible, it ought to be possible to construct an accurate set of battle maps.

A re-evaluation!!!! His book is excellent and some of the maps he showed us are more accurate in some parts than Campbell's or Tarrant's.

He's read everything published on the battle then some! he qouted some books even I hadn't heard of.

He's also read the offical papers and reports and found some inaccurracies in what Beatty reported after the battle.

The books out only in H/B at present. He seems to grasp the technology and Beatty who we disccused very well. His presentation was just 1 topic from his book, that of British F/C in the battlecruisers and why the B/C's on the British side had problems. Suffice to say I think he hit the nail on the head and he managed to dispel some rumours. Buy the book!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASI ... 85-4563154

Would you consider this an alternative to Campbell, or a compliment?

I got back from my annual Naval Warships conference here in the UK today.

I had a chance to chat with David Brown and for those of you who are fans of his work he's doing a book on the battle of the atlantic to be published next year. He also gave a great talk on RN escorts of the Second World War.

Also Dr John Brooks analysis of Jutland will be out in P/B also. He gave a great presentation on Fire-control in the Jutland Battle 'The Run to the South' by Beaty's Battlecruisers, most informative indeed!