"More Fun Stuff - Beatty's Turn Away in the Run to the South" Topic

Re the mystery of Lion's Turn away. What REALLY happened?

Chatfield's account from his memoir "Navy and Defence" (p.142)
It was not long after the disaster to the "Indefatigable", that I heard a resounding clank behind me." (referring to the hit on "Q" turret @ approximately 3:57?)
<snip>
"It was at this moment, seeing that the range was decreasing and not wishing to let it do so, I told Commander Strutt to steer 5 degrees to starboard. Strutt gave the order. The chief Quartermaster, however, misheard it as ordering him to give the ship 5 degree of port helm. I suddenly saw the ship swinging off to starboard rapidly and had to bring her back and increase speed to resume our station. The ships astern, having seen the large flame shoot up, thought we were sheering off because of the damage!"

Narrative of Gunnery Officer of HMS Lion (Longhurst?) – "The Fighting at Jutland" (p.107)
"At 3:57 one of the turrets is hit and put out of action, …
<snip>
The bearing of the enemy is now growing aft, and the range having been down to 14,500 yards at 3:54, has increased again to 16,750 at 4:01, indicating that the enemy has been altering course away slightly. The range still increases and the enemy does not fire for some ten minutes, a fact noted by the control top because there are no enemy gun flashes, and the line of view is not intermittently obstructed by columns of water thrown up by his salvoes.
<snip>
At 4:15 the enemy opens fire again, and so the running fight between the battle cruisers continues until 4:36, when the enemy, having altered course to port and being abaft the beam, has increased the range to the maximum possible for the guns, and fire is ceased."

S.M.S. "Lützow" at Jutland"; Her Gunnery Officer Commander Paschen, 1927, Royal United Services Institution Journal, 72:485, pp. 32-41
"Our fire is now very accurate; a sharp turn of 4 points by the enemy is noticed at once. At 4.52 we secure our third hit. Red flames shoot from the third turret and a great fragment, half the roof, goes up. Seventeen minutes after fire was opened, " Lion" turned sharply away, until we could see her from aft and "Princess Royal" pushed in front.
<snip>
Although we clearly observed "Lion" leaving the line, the fact is not mentioned in our opponent's accounts and is only alluded to inaccurately as a turning away of the whole line. This is contradicted by the fact, established by photos in "The Fighting at Jutland", that '‘Queen Mary" was second in the line when she blew up. It is certain that ‘' Lion " later resumed the lead, but I cannot state when this happened. At 5.8 we change target to "Princess Royal."

Excerpted from Jutland Gunnery Log of "Lion"
3:47:30 -–--- 18500 –---- Open Fire ----- steering 93 degrees.
3:49:00 ------ Ship altered course to starboard.
3:50:00 ------ 15500 ----- Suffered 1 hit from Lutzow.
3:50:30 ------ Ship altered course to starboard.
3:51:00 ------ Suffered 1 hit from Lutzow.
3:52:30 ------ Ship altered course to starboard.
3:53:00 ------ Straddled Lutzow; steering 156 degrees.
3:55:00 ------ Ship altered course to starboard.
3:56:00 ------ 15000; steering 164 degrees.
3:59:00 ------ "Q" turret knocked out at 16500 yards.
4:00:00 ------ Ship altered course to starboard.
4:01:00 ------ 16750
4:03:00 ------ A & B turrets not bearing.
4:08:00 ------ 21400
4:09:00 ------ Ship altered course to port.
4:10:00 ------ Steering 145 degrees.
4:12:00 ------ 23000
4:11:30 ------ Ship altered course to port.
4:13:00 ------ Steering 122 degrees.
4:15:00 ------ 21275

– - – - -

Comments welcome.

B

It seems like the course changes in degrees per second seem pretty high. I though it would be about 2-5 degrees per second. Did I read it right?

Wolfhag

looks like about 6 minutes for 60 degrees

It looks to me like most of these turns are roughly 2 points (22.5°), except at 3:55:00 (8°) and 4:00:00 (unknown). I'm also guessing most of these turns took about a minute (or less), since some have subsequent entries listing the new course in degrees one minute later. A minute for a two-point turn sounds reasonable, but I have no real idea what's typical for a beamy 700' ship going 25 kn.

If the last turn to starboard was also 2 points (because that seems to be the pattern here…?), then the first turn to port at 4:09:00 is over 40° – roughly 4 points, so maybe about 45° – and still only took a minute. That includes the advance, the turn, and settling, so may exceed a degree per second, but still not 2°-5°/sec.

- Ix

Wolfhag wrote -
It seems like the course changes in degrees per second seem pretty high. I though it would be about 2-5 degrees per second. Did I read it right?

It's hard to decipher with full confidence whether Lion was making periodically making discreet individual course alterations, or whether she was slowly but steadily turning under a consistent but gentle helm. I can see an argument both ways.

As far as turning rates for a given ship (in principle) are concerned, they will vary according to speed and amount of helm applied. I can email you some trials data.

B

B

Wolfhag,
Check your email.

B

Per "Lion's gunnery log document posted on Tone Lovell's website. It appears to be the original and complete document – and far more detailed than the clearly abbreviated version provided in the Jutland Despatches. I have known Tone for more than twenty years (he's also from Massachusetts) and it's embarrassing to me that I have failed so miserably to keep up to date with his superb Dreadnought Project website.

What this version of the gunnery report indicates can IMO be summed up as follows -

3.49.0 / 3.50.5 / 3.52.5 / 3.55.0 –
Four minor course alterations to starboard were ordered over this span of about six minutes. My guess that these were executed under small helm to limit speed loss and, based upon net change in target bearing from R53 to R114, averaged about one or two points each. The end result brought target bearing from Red 53 and more or less steadied it at Red 114/115.

3.58.5 –
It appears that Lion may have recorded a straddle – "2 short L 5".

3.59.0 / 3.59.5 -
Data entry for 3.59.0 still indicates target bearing at R114; data entry for 3.59.5 shows only that s salvo (3 shots?) was fired. No other spotting observation data or aim correction orders were entered in that time span. The obvious impression is that this was the moment when "Q" turret was struck.

4.00.0
Within 30 seconds after firing the 3.59.5 salvo" three splashes are spotted short. A correction of "up 200 R 3, Rapid" is sent to the guns and a course alteration to starboard is immediately ordered.

Here is where the course alteration issue gets interesting -
3.49.0 course alteration: change in target bearing in the first minute of the turn was about 4-5 degrees (a 1/2 point course change?).
3.50.5 course alteration: change in target bearing in the first minute of the turn was about 10-11 degrees (a 1 point course change?).
3.52.5 course alteration: change in target bearing in the first minute of the turn was about 9-10 degrees (a 1 point course change?).
3.55.0 course alteration: change in target bearing in the first minute of the turn was about 10 degrees (a 1 point course change?).
4.00.0 course alteration: change in target bearing in the first minute of the turn was about 15 degrees (a 1.5 point course change???).

5 degrees = approximately 1/2 point turn; OK, I can buy that; 10 degrees = approximately a 1 point turn; OK, I can buy that; But 15 degrees = approximately a 1.5 point turn …. and, if you take into consideration that the 4.00.0 turn had altered target bearing by a full 30 degrees after two minutes before being coaxed back to 136 degrees in the 3rd minute; now I am starting to wonder about Chatfield's description of a mere helm order misunderstanding.

Another point of interest:
At 4.01.00, a range cut from Lion to Lutzow gave a range reading of 16750 yds. At 4.12.00, when Lion had once again brought Lutzow back on a R91 target bearing, Lion recorded a range cut of 23,000 yds, which was about a mile beyond the reach of Lutzow's guns. Altogether, Lion had opened the range by three miles. I suggest that this was manifestly different from evasively zig-zagging to throw off enemy fire.

Strictly my opinion, of course.

If anyone reading this has practical experience at the wheel of a large warship, I'd be pleased to hear from you – no matter whether you support or dispute my thinking.

B

Blutarski,
I read the email that you sent me. My big question is how did battleships in a line maneuver and fire?

IIRC a turret can traverse at 2 degrees per second. Would the ship be able to turn and have the gunners keep their turrets on target?

I've read accounts of German ships in a line zig-zagging. How many degrees per second are they turning while zigzagging and what would the course change be?

See you soon.

Wolfhag