Drachinifel - naval history

[stevep]

   The latest drydock is available, Drydock No. 111. 

[lordroel]

The Bombardment of Ancona - Derailing Your Mobilisation - naval history - 54

[stevep]

Sept 16, 2020 11:48:23 GMT lordroel said:

The Bombardment of Ancona - Derailing Your Mobilisation - naval history - 54

  Very interesting, thanks for that.  Never heard of this before, apart from the reference to the problems of the Viribus Unitis class with operation of their main turrets and lack of ventilation.  Which appears to have been a single case with the Viribus Unitis itself which was quickly resolved.

  Given how inactive both the Italian and Austrian fleets were in general this was a dramatic and quick use of sea power.  Albeit helped that the Italian parliament openly voted on the dow before giving the Italian military permission to actually prepare for war!  Given the Italian commander in chief and the terrain of the Isonzo front it may not have been as important as Drac is suggesting.

  There is more on naval activity in the Adriatic during the conflict at wiki Adriatic_Campaign_of_World_War_I, which describes a number of other actions.

[lordroel]

Sept 16, 2020 13:33:22 GMT stevep said:

Sept 16, 2020 11:48:23 GMT lordroel said:

The Bombardment of Ancona - Derailing Your Mobilisation - naval history - 54

  Very interesting, thanks for that.  Never heard of this before, apart from the reference to the problems of the Viribus Unitis class with operation of their main turrets and lack of ventilation.  Which appears to have been a single case with the Viribus Unitis itself which was quickly resolved.

  Given how inactive both the Italian and Austrian fleets were in general this was a dramatic and quick use of sea power.  Albeit helped that the Italian parliament openly voted on the dow before giving the Italian military permission to actually prepare for war!  Given the Italian commander in chief and the terrain of the Isonzo front it may not have been as important as Drac is suggesting.

  There is more on naval activity in the Adriatic during the conflict at wiki Adriatic_Campaign_of_World_War_I, which describes a number of other actions.

There is also a Wikipedia page about this battle: Bombardment of Ancona, interesting to read that The "Otranto Barrage" would be raided by the Austro-Hungarians several times throughout the war, but major Austro-Hungarian warships rarely left the bases after this raid.

So why could the Austro-Hungarian Navy not lure the Italiaans into a naval battle, where the Italiaans content in keeping the blockade up and allow the Austro-Hungarian to bombard Italian coast instead of risking their major warships.

[stevep]

Sept 16, 2020 13:55:10 GMT lordroel said:

Sept 16, 2020 13:33:22 GMT stevep said:

  Very interesting, thanks for that.  Never heard of this before, apart from the reference to the problems of the Viribus Unitis class with operation of their main turrets and lack of ventilation.  Which appears to have been a single case with the Viribus Unitis itself which was quickly resolved.

  Given how inactive both the Italian and Austrian fleets were in general this was a dramatic and quick use of sea power.  Albeit helped that the Italian parliament openly voted on the dow before giving the Italian military permission to actually prepare for war!  Given the Italian commander in chief and the terrain of the Isonzo front it may not have been as important as Drac is suggesting.

  There is more on naval activity in the Adriatic during the conflict at wiki Adriatic_Campaign_of_World_War_I, which describes a number of other actions.

There is also a Wikipedia page about this battle: Bombardment of Ancona, interesting to read that The "Otranto Barrage" would be raided by the Austro-Hungarians several times throughout the war, but major Austro-Hungarian warships rarely left the bases after this raid.

So why could the Austro-Hungarian Navy not lure the Italiaans into a naval battle, where the Italiaans content in keeping the blockade up and allow the Austro-Hungarian to bombard Italian coast instead of risking their major warships.

  lordroel ,

  Not an expert on it but I think the support from France and Britain meant that after this initial wave of actions the Austrians dare not risk their big units against what they feared would be overwhelming odds.  Britain and France had had forces operating in the Adriatic prior to the Italian entry into the war trying to lure the Austrians into a battle but had had to withdraw to resupply.  After April 15 the Italian, who were fairly inactive themselves, were supported by mainly French forces - as the RN was largely active in the N Sea and eastern Med.  This plus Italian production meant that the Austrians would be heavily outnumbered if there was a clash between the main battle forces.

  Steve

[lordroel]

HIRMS Diana - naval history - 55

[lordroel]

Guadalcanal Campaign - 1st Savo Island (IJN 1 : 0 USN) - naval history - 56

[lordroel]

HIRMS Imperator Nikolai - naval history - 57

[lordroel]

The Battles of Narvik - 3 battles, 3 sides, 1 week - naval history - 58

[lordroel]

USS Laffey (DD-724) - naval history - 59

[lordroel]

HMS Belfast - A Town that served a Country - naval history - 60

[lordroel]

USS Tennessee - naval history - 61

[lordroel]

The development of the Naval Shell - Stop poking holes in my ship! - naval history - 62

[lordroel]

HMS New Zealand - naval history - 63

[stevep]

Oct 17, 2020 11:03:25 GMT lordroel said:

HMS New Zealand - naval history - 63

  The ship with divine intervention as Drac often puts it.   Not sure if the captain was wearing the skirt and pendant when she was 'attacked' by HMAS Australia, although even there the Kiwis came off a lot better. 

  Not sure if Britain actually needed to scrap the I class ships as their formal initial definition were armoured cruisers, it was largely the press that termed them battle-cruisers, and other ships kept older - albeit slower and less well armed, armoured cruisers for some years after the WNT [Washington Naval Treaty].