Jump to content


Photo

Battle of the River Plate


  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#21 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 604 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 18 September 2018 - 04:28 AM

I always go straight at the Spee with the cruisers to close the range as quickly as possible. My hope is that she misses early on so I can get within 15,000 yards with 
Exeter's 8 inch at which time I bring Exeter's broadside to bear. Meanwhile I continue to close with the light cruisers to get within 9,000 yards where their 6 inch will penetrate. If I can bring that off with their armament relatively intact then the Spee is in real trouble. The odds are not good, but a bit of luck early on will pay dividends in the end.

 



#22 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 737 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 02 October 2018 - 08:29 PM

Saw this pic recently and found it striking:

 

Langsdorff
 
Langsdorff et al appear to be a bit too gleeful, considering...
 
Healey
 
 

 



#23 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 737 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 23 June 2020 - 09:07 AM

A few last thoughts...

In 1591, a Spanish fleet of more than 50 ships caught an English force of 20 off the Azores, resulting in what would eventually develop into the Battle of Flores. The English had been sent there to interdict Spanish treasure ships returning to Spain from the New World; monies much needed for, among many things, the reconstruction of Spain’s navy following the catastrophe of the Armada’s attempted assault on England in 1588. Now a Spanish fleet had been dispatched to drive off, hopefully destroy, the English operating in and around the Azores.

The English, led by Lord Thomas Howard, stood at anchor as the Spanish approached. Howard hastily ordered his crews assembled and the ships off, attempting to flee north. One ship, HMS Revenge, lagged Howard’s main body, whether by design or circumstance. Captained by Sir Richard Grenville, Revenge now turned back in a possible rearguard action, and the legend of Grenville and his ship was born.

One against 50+, Revenge fought the Spanish fleet alone for three days. Boarding attempts were made numerous times, only to successfully repulse the boarders on each occasion. On the third day she would succumb, grappled by two Spanish galleons, dismasted, half her crew dead, and Grenville mortally wounded. Losses for the Spanish were equally grievous, with hundreds of casualties and a number of ships lost in the fight to overwhelm Revenge and her rogue captain.

Dialing the clock forward some 350 years, we find Graf Spee at anchor at Montevideo, grievously wounded but generally intact. An inventory of her many issues following the encounter with Exeter, Ajax, and Achilles is long, no doubt, but one wonders what might have happened if Langsdorff and his heavy cruiser had attempted a Grenville-esque fight against what he was led to believe was a far superior force waiting for him off the coast. I had thoughts of doctoring up the log sheets with the accumulated unrepaired damage for the protagonists and returning to the table, but in the end I came to understand Langsdorff’s torment and decided to let it pass.

There are a number of good books out there recapping the actions of December 13, 1939, but I find myself relying heavily on Geoffrey Bennett’s Battle of the River Plate from 1972. He provides a good recap of the day’s action, together with a detailed description of the damage to Langsdorff’s cruiser and Harwood’s force. Other sources provide information which is absent Bennet’s account, but the accumulation of it all recreates the ugly picture facing Langsdorff.

Perhaps first and foremost, an issue that Bennett mentions nearly in passing, was the damage to Spee’s fuel filtration system. Early on she’d taken an 8” hit from Exeter amidship, just aft her funnel, which had damaged the fuel filtration system, her desalination plant, and the ship’s galley. Of the three, fuel filtration was the most serious, as without that capability she had less than a day’s diesel fuel for her eight diesel engines (four sets of two). There was no chance she could return home with this damage unrepaired, but a run south to a friendly Argentine port might have provided a window for such work. Then again, the British forces assembling to destroy her would have only increased, regardless of her location.

She had some serious damage to her forecastle/bow that might have proved problematic in heavy seas, something she might have encountered had she made a run for home. Rudimentary repairs by the crew had mitigated the damage somewhat, perhaps being manageable if no further damage was incurred. Tough to say.

Ammunition was certainly an issue, as it was for the British as well (sort of). Bennett wrote that Spee had only 186 rounds of 11” remaining (roughly 31 rounds per gun or 20-30 minutes of continuous action), but no 5.9” or 4.1”. To put some perspective on that, she had expended over 400 rounds of 11" in the first go-round, while emptying her secondary and tertiary magazines. Ajax had 777 rounds of 6” left, and Achilles just 359 rounds, enough for an action of 30-40 minutes and 15-20 minutes respectively. Exeter, heavily damaged by Spee, had withdrawn. That might seem like reasonable odds for a fight, but it fails to consider HMS Cumberland. She arrived late on the 14th, fresh and well-armed.

Spee’s Arado 196 floatplane had been destroyed in the initial scrape, so she was blind beyond the horizon. Facing what was perceived to be a superior force, the implications are obvious. Similarly, nearly all of her AA positions were gone. She'd have no chance of defending herself should the "Stringbags" manage an attack. Meanwhile, Ajax, Achilles, and Cumberland's floatplanes had the ability to keep tabs on the German.

The British intelligence ruse certainly played into Langsdorff’s consideration, but I discounted that for the purposes here. Grenville knowingly faced 50 opposing ships, yet still elected to turn back and weigh into the Spaniards. Some suggest that the German navy never exhibited the stomach for a fight at long odds, and this might be true. For Langsdorff, however, scuttling his ship and killing himself became the best alternative to the possible, perhaps likely, slaughter of his crew. I’ve come to understand that, although I've never understood putting a pistol to one's head to honor the long-standing tradition of "the captain must go down with his ship".

Maybe we come back to this at some point, or maybe we don't, but for now, Plate is in the books. We’re moving on.



#24 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 737 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 01 May 2023 - 03:02 PM

Some things you just can't leave alone; began prepping for Plate in 1/2400:

 

Graf Spee D
 
Gonna need a big table at this scale.
 
 

 



#25 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 604 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 01 May 2023 - 04:16 PM

If you are using the end on fire (crossing the Tee) modifier (optional rules) then GS's belt armor is reduced to CL and your Brit 6" will penetrate that out to 15,000 yards normally. In addition, beyond 18,000 yards your 6" using a D20, hitting on 1, penetrate CL armor also.

 

I advise going straight at GS with the CLs. GS is likely to use her MB for the CA in any case. That leaves her with her SB to target the closest CL and her TB the other CL (to prevent it being considered unengaged). But that is the case no matter which way you go at it. If you cannot cross her Tee, then your 6" need to get within 9,000 yards to penetrate her belt and MB armor. But you are taking out her SB, TB and torps at any range. By going straight at GS your close as fast as you can. Any diversion off the straight at her approach lengthens the time needed to close within 9,000 yards. Also, you second RB for your torps is 8,200 yards and you would be hitting (if broadside on with no evasion) on a 1-6. If she surrenders, change her name to Coronel, a more perfect revenge on her namesake.

 

WMC



#26 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 604 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 01 May 2023 - 04:31 PM

GS's FP cracked her engine block the day before and they could not repair her with what they had on hand. I don't know if Altmark could have helped with that. Langsdorf was already (before the fight) having concerns about his engines. Langsdorf had avoided trade focal points until he became concerned for his engines, and he decided to head home to Germany. But now that he considered his raiding career over, he reversed his past decision to avoid engagement and decided to try his luck off River Plate. GS sighted Harwood's force some 10 minutes before Harwood sighted the GS and GS could have turned away. But the disabled FP limited Langsdorf to what his masthead reported. The masthead report was a cruiser and 2 destroyers and Langsdorf decided to engage based on that erroneous report. Langsdorf ordered full speed thinking he could have an advantage over the cruiser while it managed to get its full power online and the sudden increase in his diesel smoke was what alerted Harwood to his presence.

 

WMC



#27 Peter M. Skaar

Peter M. Skaar

    Captain

  • Members
  • 336 posts

Posted 02 May 2023 - 11:03 AM

I think this is a very good classic wargame match-up.  I played a version of this engagement at Historicon one year using a rules-set that was being playtested for GHQ.  I remember it was a lot of fun. 



#28 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 604 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 02 May 2023 - 06:59 PM

Well, it is my favorite introductory scenario for sure and the first that I ever acquired ships for to play. In my experience, if the GS does all it can to keep its distance and gets a bit lucky with its gunnery dice then the cruisers are screwed. But if GS's dice are bad, it is toast.

 

I started playing the scenario in Germany in the late 70s in 1:2400 scale. I've played it in 1:1250 and 1:6000 so many times since then that I have no idea of exactly how many times I've played it. In every case where GS won her 11" were hot and when she lost, not.

 

WMC



#29 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 737 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 03 May 2023 - 08:04 AM

Yes, I agree, it's a great little introductory scenario, especially if as controller/umpire you let the the players find their way. As a player, the less you know of the grand scheme of things, the better. Live for the moment because tomorrow is uglier yet.

 

After numerous plays on the tabletop, the strategy for the RN grows intuitively obvious - draw the PB's fire with your lone heavy cruiser while closing the range with your brace of murderous rapid-firing light cruisers. Anything but exceptional dice for the German will typically spell his doom if he chooses to fight.

 

But what is the optimal strategy for Langsdorff and his ship? It would seem that any amount of damage, while not fatal tactically on this day, is likely mortal operationally in those that follow. So run? Motor as fast your props will push you along, cloaking yourself liberally in smoke with just the occasional salvo to keep 'em honest? The PB, however, is the slowest ship of the four, and by a good 4-5 knots. so unless you knock your adversaries down, you can't run forever. Your fate will likely hang on that aft 11-inch triple battery...lose that and you're a goner.

 

Hindsight weighs heavy...one is better off not knowing. It's a terrific puzzle, one that I come back to over and over. If I think about it, it keeps me awake at night :D



#30 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 604 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 03 May 2023 - 11:44 AM

IMHO, the GS was doomed when Langsdorf waived his self-imposed restrictions on engaging as that allowed his preference for aggressiveness its first chance to take the lead in his thinking. The sea change in his thinking was not preceded by a sea change in his situation. I've always seen it as a cautionary note when I'm campaigning. What can go wrong will go wrong and if you forget that an opponent like Harwood will brutally remind you.

 

I do not normally feel much empathy for Germans with problems during either WW. But Langsdorf's decidedly un-Nazi like concern for the lives of his crew strikes a chord with me. The bullet though gives me pause. After all isn't that exactly what Herr Hitler expected of Paulus when he promoted him to Feld Marshal? Oh, the contradictory aspects of National Socialism. 

 

WMC



#31 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 737 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 03 May 2023 - 04:24 PM

Perhaps Langsdorff's long spell of good fortunes had him believing his own smoke...it happens to many, especially, but not limited to, politicians and some business people. At some point one starts to think he or she is smarter than everyone else, which ultimately causes a slip-up that brings one down to earth again, sometimes catastrophically.

 

Presumably he could have just sat out the remainder of the war as an intern. How he convinced himself to take the "honorable" way out is beyond me, but then I've never understood the notion of "going down with the ship" either.  



#32 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 604 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 03 May 2023 - 06:21 PM

The decision to try his luck off River Plate ran completely contradictory to the way he had operated from the start. My understanding of his desire for engagement comes from things he wrote in a diary and conversations with his officers. He felt that his mission required him to operate the way he did rather than to seek engagement as he wanted. Then his engines started to act up and he decided to head home. That to his mind apparently ended his commerce raiding mission that had precluded engagement. But as we both know, it's a long way to Tipperary and Germany was even further. So, the need to avoid engagement and its attendant risk of unrepairable damage had not gone away. Then his FP cracked its block on 12 Dec. At that point he was reliant on his masthead lookouts, and they misidentified Ajax and Achilles as destroyers. But none of that killed him. It was his decision to engage that led to that.

 

WMC



#33 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 737 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 06 May 2023 - 04:41 PM

For those interested, here's "The Battle of the River Plate: An Account of Events Before, During and After the Action Up To the Self-Destruction of the Admiral Graf Spee", as compiled by the Admiralty from dispatches of the RN participants:

 

https://babel.hathit...&view=1up&seq=3

 

Published in 1940, so it's a wartime account likely subjected to some pasteurization by the RN editors.

 

 

 

 



#34 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 604 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 07 May 2023 - 01:22 AM

I take it that you were not using the end on fire (Crossing the Tee) optional rule. That rule basically reduces the GS's belt armor to CL when the ship(s) firing at her are outside GS' broadside arc. That makes it tough for GS to keep her distance without down grading her gunnery as she needs to end her movement with the Brits in her broadside arc. Also, there is an optional rule that allows unengaged ships to shift their range band down one and negates the multiple batteries modifier for the unengaged ship(s). Of course, GS's cure for that is to engage the second cruiser, but at the ranges you are indicating that takes the 5.9" battery and that also requires the target to be in GS' broadside arc. Taking on multiple targets with GS' small MB, SB and TB is rough any way you cut it.

 

And GS lack of a FP does not help as she has to let her MB target get within 15,000 yards to hit on a 2. With air spot she can do that at 18,000 yards where Exeter's 8" still do not penetrate. 

 

WMC



#35 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 737 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 07 May 2023 - 10:03 AM

Given the number of his protagonists and his relative speed disadvantage, Langsdorff's general situation would seem akin to being caught in the open during a Texas hailstorm - you can't run, you can't hide, and you can't make it stop. Well, he can make it stop with some early-on extremely accurate shooting that wreaks havoc on his adversaries, but the odds of that seem extraordinarily long (if he's dependent upon my dice-rolling, he should probably just scuttle the ship during the first few minutes).

 

We have used the optional rules, which only serves to make the situation more dire from the get-go. There's not much that works in favor of Graf Spee without some extremely accurate gunnery early on. The historical result, the German cruiser's escape, albeit with some serious damage and the depletion of much of its ammunition, seems an optimal result (unless the RN player suffers poor dice, is overly cautious, or simply has a faulty strategy).



#36 Phil Callcott

Phil Callcott

    Corporal

  • Members
  • 74 posts

Posted 07 May 2023 - 11:48 AM

A question please regarding Graf Spee.  Her torpedo tubes were mounted right aft either side of the stern, could they be trained fully aft to launch down the throat of a pursuing vessel?  

 

I appreciate that launching torps into a turbulent wake might be problematic, but could it be done by GS?

 

Thanks in anticipation, Phil

 

 



#37 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 604 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 07 May 2023 - 11:55 AM

I agree with your assessment entirely. The GS must hit early and often against Exeter to keep her outside 15,000 yards. GS has more time with the two Leander class, but not if she has failed to put paid to Exeter.

 

Another tactic Exeter can use is evasive maneuver. She will lose 25% of her 32-knot speed using such movement, reducing her to 24 knots. But she will half both GS' and her gunnery dice rounded down. That leaves GS with one D12 looking for a 1 or 10 until Exeter gets inside 15,000 yards. I know the GS is now two knots faster, but she has to end her movement with Exeter in her broadside arc or suffer end on fire reducing her belt armor to CL and penetrable by Exeter's 8" at any distance. The amount of turning GS will have to do to accomplish that and still keep as much distance as is possible will exceed 4 points and hurt her gunnery with a range band shift upwards. Exeter on the other hand does not care if she suffers end on fire during her approach as her armor offers no protection in any case against GS' 11".

 

I know; none of the above helps the GS. My best advice to the GS is that she needs Herr Adolph's presence and to not leave Germany without him. That way, his "You should go down with the ship" mentality will have a positive ending.

 

WMC



#38 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 604 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 07 May 2023 - 12:12 PM

I believe that GS has to turn enough to get the targeted ship in her broadside arc in order to clear her fantail. However, German torpedoes at this point in the war are considered duds if the resolution DR results in an "even" result. That reduces GS chances in the first range band (0-4400 yards) to 1, 3 & 5 without evasion (it should be a bow shot and if not, you hit on a 7 also). If in the second range band (4500 to 6500 yards) then you hit on 1, 3 & 5 and a bow shot automatically misses as it is off the chart.

 

Now, you can use extended range, but that means your range bands are 4,000, 8,000 & 8,700 yards respectively, so not much gain. In any case if you can target a ship with torpedoes then that ship is inside 9,000 yards and penetrating your armor. And, in the case of a Leander class 6" cruiser is able to rapid fire, hitting on 1, 2, 3, 10, 11 & 12. 

 

WMC



#39 healey36

healey36

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 737 posts
  • LocationMaryland USA

Posted 07 May 2023 - 12:26 PM

A question please regarding Graf Spee.  Her torpedo tubes were mounted right aft either side of the stern, could they be trained fully aft to launch down the throat of a pursuing vessel?  

 

I appreciate that launching torps into a turbulent wake might be problematic, but could it be done by GS?

 

Thanks in anticipation, Phil

 

That's an interesting question. The "Arc of Fire" rule (1.4.3) would seem to preclude a directly-aft shot, limited to any direction "except within 50 degrees of the bow or stern. A close examination of the ship's mounts would also appear to preclude a directly aft shot; however, rules aside, it would appear that the mounts could be rotated such that a launch outside the 50-degree limit would be possible (25-30 degrees off the center axis certainly looks possible to me, especially aft). 

52877536782_63b5662431_o.jpg

Just sayin'...



#40 W. Clark

W. Clark

    Lt Colonel

  • Members
  • 604 posts
  • LocationOregon, out in the sticks

Posted 07 May 2023 - 08:55 PM

You raise a good point IMHO. I'd resolve it this way. Using the wing turret arc with one side of the against the side of the ship, any ship outside the arc (towards the broadside arc) is targetable. You are certainly clear of the fantail and you are getting an increased arc that stern mounted BS torpedoes seem to have over normal waist BS mounts. The Deutschland class's stern mounts are unusual and probably merit their own torpedo arc because of it.

 

WMC






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users