Torpedos

[kurt]

Reading the Osprey book on British Battlecruisers raised a question. Did any of these ships or any large ships every actually use their torpedoes? Was it just a holdover from the previous war?

[Werner]

Capital ships fired torpedoes at Jutland. The illuminating factor of the battle was not the uselessness of underwater torpedo flats, but what a flooding menace they were after plunging hits from moderate to long range.

[Guest]

Reading the Osprey book on British Battlecruisers raised a question. Did any of these ships or any large ships every actually use their torpedoes? Was it just a holdover from the previous war?

Werner, I am not aware of any captial ship actually firing an underwater torpedo tube during Jutland. However, the German Battlecruiser Lutzow sank because of the impossibility of containing the flooding of the large undivided torpedo room in the bow. So you might say capital ship torpedos sank a German battlecruiser in Jutland.



Incidentally, HMS Rodney did infact fire her oversized 25 inch underwater torpedo tubes at the Bismark just prior to the start of the final gunnery action. But there is no record of a hit. This is the only instance I am aware of where one dreadnough battleship attempted to torpedo another.

[Seasick]

The torpedos on the Royal Navy battleships and battle cruisers were a hold over from the predreadnought era. The Nelson did fire a 24.5 inch torpedo at the Bismarck and claimed a hit. The hit was disputed by the Germans and couldn't be varified when the wreck was found and dived.

[JoeA]

The Nelson did fire a 24.5 inch torpedo at the Bismarck and claimed a hit.

No it was Rodney not Nelson.

[ingura]

...

[Guest]

Luztow was flooded by gun fire, but it was the flooding of her torpedo flat far forward that put her bow under that she could no longer navigate. It is true that British engine spaces were much larger, but they were in the middle of the ship, and their flood has very short moment arm about the center of bouyancy. So if the engine room flood, it would bring the ship bodily lower in the water, but it would not put the ship severely out of trim. The torpedo flat is so far forward that it has half the length of the ship as moment arm about the center of buoyancy. Much less water in the bow can put the ship severely nose down.

In the end, Lutzow was not lost because she took on so much water that she bodily sank. She was lost because the flooding of her forward torpedo flat put her so far out of trim that she could no longer navigate.

[JWintjes]

In the end, Lutzow was not lost because she took on so much water that she bodily sank. She was lost because the flooding of her forward torpedo flat put her so far out of trim that she could no longer navigate.

In all fairness one probably has to concede that L�tzow was lost mainly due to the tactical circumstances preventing her from making her way back home. We have to remember that Seydlitz was nearly as crippled and got away.

Incidentally, it is interesting to note that Seydlitz shared the forward torpedo handling room - which I strongly believe was a major design flaw in German capital ship design. It gives a testimony to the otherwise quite robust construction of the ship.

Jorit

[chuck]

Incidentally, the issue of large free flood spaces outside the main citadel was never completely solved. In battleships with all or nothing protection this problem is particularly acute because splinter damage could riddle the unarmored bow and stern and bring the ship severely out of trim without any serious hits.