World Naval Ships Forums  
CURRENT SPECIAL OFFERS ON OUR HUGE SELECTION OF NAVAL ART PRINTS!

Go Back   World Naval Ships Forums > Naval History > Battles and Events
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Battles and Events Topics covering naval battles, actions, fleet reviews and any other naval events.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #76  
Old 16-04-2012, 17:04
jainso31 jainso31 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DONCASTER S.YORKS UK
Posts: 8,748
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

So OK- the 4.5" hits were made at 0425, when the range was near to 18000 yds;surely that strengthens the case for two hits being from 4.5"guns???
What is it that makes you think the hits were made at 0425; and why is it so significant???

jainso31

Last edited by jainso31 : 16-04-2012 at 19:20.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 17-04-2012, 04:04
Paul C.'s Avatar
Paul C. Paul C. is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Jamaica
Posts: 283
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Here's where the 4:25 time is from:

(Remember the German times are 1 hour ahead, so 5:00 = 4:00 in British accounts)

The map I posted notes a 114 mm (4.5-inch) hit on Turret Anton at 5:15 AM and the foretop hit by the 381 mm (15-inch) shell at 5:25.

However, according to the KBismarck discussion - Gneisenau's war diary puts the foretop hit at 5:16, but Lutjen's log has it at 5:25 - agreeing with the map. Who is right?

The flooding of Anton is what occured heavily at 5:34, which seems to have lead to the assumption that a hit occured at that time. But it may well have been due to the new course of Gneisenau, retreating from Renown at that time, that took her into the wind and waves at increasing speed causing a deluge of seawater over her bows. The damaged turret was therefore inundated.

So I think in my account I may have transposed the times and put the foretop hit first and the smaller hits at the later time... That may not be correct!

Confused? I don't blame you... I don't know if it is even possible to rationalize all this!
__________________

Paul
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 17-04-2012, 07:38
jainso31 jainso31 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DONCASTER S.YORKS UK
Posts: 8,748
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Paul-your fastidiousness is amazing and is to be admired; but when push comes to shove; it still comes down to the fact that these last hits on Gneisenau WERE from 4.5" shells.
The order of the hits; as Vince has them, is possibly incorrect. Anton turret's flooding occurred at 0534 (0434=Vince's given time of the strike on Anton turret)

jainso31
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 18-04-2012, 03:32
Paul C.'s Avatar
Paul C. Paul C. is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Jamaica
Posts: 283
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Jim, you are way too kind!

I guess it's a little frustating not to be able to dissect this action down to the minute as has been done and done and done with the Denmark Strait, but sometimes you are forced to leave well enough alone!

I really must thank EVERYONE who has contributed to this thread. I've been so gratified by the response (including those who read, but did not post - I thank you for your attention!) and I'm sure we've all learned something.

Renown, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were all great ships in their own right - fast, powerful, beautiful and all made major contributions to the war effort of their respective side.

Though this battle between them was inconclusive, it did set the tone for most future encounters between major British and German warships for the rest the war, based on the German naval directive that opponents of equal or greater strength should be avoided - "No unnecessary risks!". The Kriegsmarine could ill afford to lose its ships - a small, but highly potent and capable force.

The Royal Navy could ill afford not to make every effort to subdue them. As the Admiralty grudgingly stated after the vindication of Admiral Somerville's conduct of the Spartivento action in its ill-advised inquiry:

Quote:
No opportunity must be allowed to pass of attaining what is in fact the ultimate objective of the Royal Navy - the destruction of the enemy's forces whenever and wherever encountered.
Renown certainly gave it her all off Stromvaer Light.

__________________

Paul
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 18-04-2012, 03:34
Vince O'Hara Vince O'Hara is offline
Sub-Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 145
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

I note the contradictions in the timing of events and I'll see where I got the times that I cited in my book, hopefully tomorrow. One generic comment I'll make that will come as no surprise to anyone here is that the accounts of most naval actions are full of discrepancies and contradictions. One of my favorite examples can be found in the London Gazette (12 May 1948) account of the action off Sfax on 16 April 1941. The Gazette reprints the reports of the British destroyer captains who participated. Jervis gives the time when she opened fire as 0220, Janus says it was 0222, Nubian 0210 and Mohawk 0205.

Vince
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 18-04-2012, 07:10
jainso31 jainso31 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DONCASTER S.YORKS UK
Posts: 8,748
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Excellent postscript Paul and one of the finest photographs of the great ship that was Renown.

jainso31
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 18-04-2012, 13:48
Vince O'Hara Vince O'Hara is offline
Sub-Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 145
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C. View Post
Here's where the 4:25 time is from:

(Remember the German times are 1 hour ahead, so 5:00 = 4:00 in British accounts)

The map I posted notes a 114 mm (4.5-inch) hit on Turret Anton at 5:15 AM and the foretop hit by the 381 mm (15-inch) shell at 5:25.

However, according to the KBismarck discussion - Gneisenau's war diary puts the foretop hit at 5:16, but Lutjen's log has it at 5:25 - agreeing with the map. Who is right?

The flooding of Anton is what occured heavily at 5:34, which seems to have lead to the assumption that a hit occured at that time. But it may well have been due to the new course of Gneisenau, retreating from Renown at that time, that took her into the wind and waves at increasing speed causing a deluge of seawater over her bows. The damaged turret was therefore inundated.

So I think in my account I may have transposed the times and put the foretop hit first and the smaller hits at the later time... That may not be correct!

Confused? I don't blame you... I don't know if it is even possible to rationalize all this!
The 0434 time cited for the second hit comes from the British Naval Staff History reprinted in Naval Operations of the Campaign in Norway which states on page 21: "At 0434 the Gneisenau received a second hit which struck 'A' turret by the left hood of the rangefinder."

The war diary for Gneisenau reprinted in Battleships of the Scharnhorst class has this entry for 0534 (German times are an hour ahead) "'A' turret flooding due to heavy seas. Large pumps requested. Heavy quantities seawater coming in through left optic of rangefinder cupola after hit knocked away cover."

I don't know if this relieves the confusion any but at least it provides an authority for the 0434 time. Looking at it now and in light of this discussion, I'd guess the first 4.5-inch hit occured some minutes before 0434.

Vince
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 18-04-2012, 14:00
jainso31 jainso31 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DONCASTER S.YORKS UK
Posts: 8,748
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

The above statement from Vince echoes what I said in #78.

jainso31
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 27-12-2013, 13:41
argaum argaum is offline
Recruit
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Hi ,i am at home with my grandads medals,photos and pendant HMS RENOWN (action 1940)this is a great read for me things i just did not now. my grandad was a stoker W.V.DAVEY . THANKS ANDY.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul C. View Post
Hi all,

I did a search and could not find a thread devoted to the details of this action, so I thought I'd put something together. Hope you'll enjoy reading it and will add your comments.


Basic Background

This action took place during the ultimately successful invasion of Norway by the Germans in April 1940. With British and German naval forces at sea carrying out various operations it was inevitable that clashes would and did occur.


Main References:

Peter C. Smith – The Battlecruiser Renown 1916-1948
Garzke & Dulin – Battleships – Axis and Neutral Battleships of WW2
Fritz Otto Busch – The Sinking of the Scharnhorst
John Jordan – An Illustrated Guide to Battleships and Battlecruisers
KBismarck Forum Thread – “Battle of Stromvaer”
WNS Forum Thread – “Galloper’s Good Gunnery”
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 02-01-2014, 08:50
Rupert Rupert is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,261
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

In terms of what the RN could have done better, the one possibility that has not been discussed (I think) is for the destroyers to hold fire. It is not clear that their presence would have been known without the fireflashes.

Holding fire could have encouraged to the German ships to turn and close on (apparent) lone RN vessel.

Far from certain and only with the benefit of hindsight, but it is a possibility
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 04-01-2014, 16:15
jainso31 jainso31 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DONCASTER S.YORKS UK
Posts: 8,748
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Quote from#1
The British destroyers made a spirited attempt to take part in the battle, firing their 4.7-inch guns, but they were eventually left behind, unable to keep pace with the speeding Renown in the heavy seas. Their gun flashes, however, looked impressive enough to the Germans to influence their continuation of the action.

The above is from paul C's original post and certainly bears out Rupert's assertion that the destroyers shell flashes may well have influenced the German decision to break off the action-the destroyers, in any case; being left behind. In those circumstances the RN could not have done better

jainso31

Last edited by jainso31 : 04-01-2014 at 17:08.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 08-07-2014, 13:32
jainso31 jainso31 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DONCASTER S.YORKS UK
Posts: 8,748
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Gneisenau and Scharnhorst closed formation and reduced speed because of flooding in their forward turrets.Despite their complaints that Renown fired fast and continuously while they were being handicapped by the heavy seas and machinery breakdowns;and the top heavy Renown laboured much harder in the heavy weather that the two modern battleships.
Renown fired 230 15" rounds- mostly from A and B turrets;and 1065 5.5" rounds,Severe blast damage allowed sea water to flood into her A and Y shell rooms. Scharnhorst fired 195 11" rounds from from Caesar turret and 91 5.9" rounds. Gneisenau fired only 54 main battery rounds and nothing from her secondary armament.
German 11" shells hit Renown twice for a hit rate of 0.8%.Renown landed but one 15" shell hit Gneisenau's foretop, for a hit rate of 0.4%.The German's mounted 18 X 11" guns to Renown's 6 X 15" guns .In the circumstances Whitworth was lucky that Lutjens chose to run rather than fight-what if they had chosen to stay,deploy and fight?? Question is -why didn't he???
The German battleships returned to Germany on 12th April;after the British sank all ten destroyers they were supposed to support.

jainso31

Last edited by jainso31 : 08-07-2014 at 15:01.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 08-07-2014, 15:20
M. A. Rozon M. A. Rozon is offline
Sub-Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 108
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Quote:
Originally Posted by jainso31 View Post
In the circumstances Whitworth was lucky that Lutjens chose to run rather than fight-what if they had chosen to stay,deploy and fight?? Question is -why didn't he???jainso31
Admittedly a quote from Wikipedia but, perhaps to answer some of this particular question:

"At the outbreak of World War II, Lütjens was Commander of Scouting Forces. In April 1940, during the invasion of Denmark and Norway (Operation Weserübung), he served as Vice Admiral, commanding the distant cover forces in the North Sea—which consisted of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. His superior, Vizeadmiral Wilhelm Marschall, had fallen ill just before the operation, so he assumed command of the Narvik and Trondheim landings.

Lütjens' mission was to draw British units away from Narvik and facilitate the landings there. During the landing phase, his forces were approached by an Royal Navy task-force led by the battlecruiser HMS Renown. The British ship engaged at 05:05 and Lütjens was forced to fight an inconclusive battle with Renown. He succeeded in extracting the German vessels without incurring major battle damage. He viewed his operation as a success.

It may have been possible for him to turn on and sink Renown by attacking from different directions, using Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, but the accompanying British destroyers were well placed to join the fight had he done so. His Commander-in-Chief, Erich Raeder, endorsed his actions which would have placed him against a clear eastern horizon as opposed to an enemy that was positioned against a darkened western horizon. Action at that time would have given the enemy a clearer silhouette to aim at while obscuring the British ships somewhat. Under those circumstances, Raeder felt the British would have had a tactical advantage. Lütjens later rendezvoused with the Admiral Hipper and reached Wilhelmshaven on 12 April, having avoided a major fleet action.

Lütjens nearly changed his mind during the battle, believing a pitched fight may bring relief to the German destroyer force at Narvik—a force which he had effectively been forced to abandon in the face of enemy sea superiority. But the prospect of running into HMS Rodney, now known by German naval intelligence to be in the vicinity, was too much of a risk. In the resultant Battles of Narvik 10 German destroyers were sunk and the campaign for the port lasted until June. In the wake of Lütjens return, he learned Marschall had recovered to assume command."

In short, it would seem that his orders were not to seek battle but to draw heavy enemy forces away from other German naval operations. He carried out his orders and for this he was rewarded. Marschall would later seek battle against orders, sinking Glorious but taking serious damage in the course of that engagement and was sacked.

Bigger Guns, MORE POWER!

Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 08-07-2014, 15:53
jainso31 jainso31 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DONCASTER S.YORKS UK
Posts: 8,748
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

"Quote by M A Rozon

"Lütjens nearly changed his mind during the battle, believing a pitched fight may bring relief to the German destroyer force at Narvik—a force which he had effectively been forced to abandon in the face of enemy sea superiority. But the prospect of running into HMS Rodney, now known by German naval intelligence to be in the vicinity, was too much of a risk. In the resultant Battles of Narvik 10 German destroyers were sunk and the campaign for the port lasted until June. In the wake of Lütjens return, he learned Marschall had recovered to assume command."

Leaving the "what if" (Rodney) out of the issue-what does the statement "in the face of enemy sea superiority " mean precisely in this particular case.The British destroyers made a spirited attempt to take part in the battle, firing their 4.7-inch guns, but they were eventually left behind, unable to keep pace with the speeding Renown in the heavy seas.

jainso31

Last edited by jainso31 : 08-07-2014 at 16:28.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 08-07-2014, 16:41
PhilipG PhilipG is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Arundel, Sussex
Posts: 202
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Quote:
Originally Posted by jainso31 View Post

Leaving the "what if" (Rodney) out of the issue-what does the statement "in the face of enemy sea superiority " mean precisely in this particular case
Jim I feel that the phrase comes from German intelligence, Rodney was meant to be close by, Renown was known to be there as they had engaged, there were probably over a dozen RN destroyers with the capital ships and the aircraft carrier Glorious was not too far away.

As a German Navy leader in this position, with ships that had been damaged by shell fire and the weather, the thought of dealing with any of these more powerful fleet units would have been daunting if not verging on the insane.

I am not sure what effect on German battle doctrine the loss of the Admiral Graf Spee had, the Kriegsmarine did not have many major units.

What would have been interesting is if Glorious and Ark Royal had been in the area, the Germans must have been aware that Glorious was back with the Home Fleet after her refit in Malta.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 08-07-2014, 17:18
jainso31 jainso31 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DONCASTER S.YORKS UK
Posts: 8,748
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Quote Philip

"Jim I feel that the phrase comes from German intelligence, Rodney was meant to be close by, Renown was known to be there as they had engaged, there were probably over a dozen RN destroyers with the capital ships and the aircraft carrier Glorious was not too far away."

I see where you are coming from Philip but :-
1 Rodney was not close by- she was with the HF leaving Scapa on the 8th
2 Renown's destroyers had been left behind during the chase and
3 Glorious was proceeding to GB and was sunk by Scharnhorst as she left the scene of action with Gneisenau

However I concede that these "what ifs" would have to be taken into the German viewpoint as being "real" dangers.They had carried out part of the task, by luring Renown away from the scene at Narvik.

jainso31

Last edited by jainso31 : 08-07-2014 at 17:49.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 09-07-2014, 03:31
Paul C.'s Avatar
Paul C. Paul C. is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Jamaica
Posts: 283
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Hi all,

I find the Rodney reference a bit ironic since Luetjens was on Gneisenau whose spotters had identified Renown as "Nelson" - hence they fired mostly base-fused HE shells after 2 opening salvos of AP. It was Scharnhorst that correctly identified the Renown.

I would think they would have figured out that it could not be a Nelson when they had such a hard time getting away.

Jim, I don't see why Renown was "top heavy" - her full reconstruction made her handle "like a destroyer". It was Hood and Repulse that may have had that problem with all their pre-war and wartime additions that cost them freeboard. Her main problem with her hull in the heavy seas was her bulges which were torn away.

Paul
__________________

Paul
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 09-07-2014, 07:32
jainso31 jainso31 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DONCASTER S.YORKS UK
Posts: 8,748
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Paul-In 1936 it was decided to give Renown a massive rebuild, in the line of the rebuilds of the Queen Elizabeth-class ships. Her entire superstructure was torn down to the deck and completely rebuilt. Her engines were replaced with modern, more powerful, machinery. After the rebuild, Renown was actually capable of surpassing the speed of one of the fastest battlecruisers in the fleet: HMS Hood.
Her secondary battery was also completely overhauled, removing the 4" guns and replacing them with dual-purpose 4.5"/45 Mark I and III guns. The torpedo tubes were removed and the AA guns were replaced by three octuple 2-pounder Pom-Pom AA emplacements.According to her 1939 statistics-she was 4000 tons heavier.

Perhaps my original source misconstrued this aspect.

jainso31

Last edited by jainso31 : 09-07-2014 at 08:56.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 09-07-2014, 10:42
jainso31 jainso31 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DONCASTER S.YORKS UK
Posts: 8,748
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

The eminent naval historian Correli Barnett in his book "Engage the Enemy more Closely"pub 1992 p111 and I quote:-

"In the event it was Whitworth with Renown who encountered the Scharnhost and Gneisenau and their destroyer escort at 0337 9th April,some 50 miles off Vestfjord; as the German ships were steering north on their "diversionary" course-simulating a breakout into the Atlantic.It was now blowing a full gale,with mountainous seas and sudden curtains of snow or rain.

At 0405 Renown opened fire with her 15" guns at a range of about 15000yds-twelve minutes later she knocked out Gneisenau's main gunnery control system,which persuaded the enemy to run for it.In the stern chase that ensued,Whitworth hit Gneisenau twice at 0434 and knocked out a forward turret.However the weather was on the side of the German ships and which caused the Renown to slow down in order to fight her fore turrets and the speeding Germans to fight their after turrets.

Although at times Whitworth drove Renown up to 29kts,the two German ships had disappeared from view amid a squall.Nevertheless,a british force had asserted a moral supremacy.The fact that Whitworth had been compelled to fight two modern battlecruisers was mark of the Admiralt's failure to read German strategic intentions correctly and concentrate Britain's naval resources in the key areas-as opposed to protecting minelayers elsewhere"

jainso31
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 09-07-2014, 11:21
Paul C.'s Avatar
Paul C. Paul C. is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Jamaica
Posts: 283
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Quote:
The eminent naval historian Correli Barnett in his book "Engage the Enemy more Closely"pub 1992 p111 and I quote:-

"In the event it was Whitworth with Renown who encountered the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau and their destroyer escort
Uh oh...Mr. Barnett seems to have switched the side of the destroyer escort!

Quote:
The fact that Whitworth had been compelled to fight two modern battlecruisers was mark of the Admiralt's failure to read German strategic intentions correctly and concentrate Britain's naval resources in the key areas-as opposed to protecting minelayers elsewhere"
Well we know that Repulse was in the general area and joined with Renown later that day (about 1400), obviously way too late. It would have been an interesting scenario if she'd been there for the battle.
__________________

Paul
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 09-07-2014, 11:45
jainso31 jainso31 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DONCASTER S.YORKS UK
Posts: 8,748
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

I would assume here Paul- that they (S&G) were shepherding the destroyers to the Narvik area-yes- all ten of them; and which they signalled to go on to their appointed areas when they came under fire from Renown; and these were the destroyers that were sunk in the Vestfjord on the 10th to 13th April 1940. So no I do not think he got them wrong but misnamed them, by calling them "escort"; but again what else would they do "en voyage"???

Re. Repulse-she may have made a difference- IF she were deployed such that she was NOT also following in the wake of the German capital ships.

jainso31
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 09-07-2014, 18:28
BCRenown's Avatar
BCRenown BCRenown is offline
Vice Commodore
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
Posts: 744
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

[quote][...The fact that Whitworth had been compelled to fight two modern battlecruisers was mark of the Admiralt's failure to read German strategic intentions correctly and concentrate Britain's naval resources in the key areas-as opposed to protecting minelayers elsewhere"
/QUOTE]

But it would certainly have suited British 'strategic intentions' if one or both of the German battleships had failed to make it back to port.
__________________
Keep well and keep posting,
Monty

<a href=http://www.worldnavalships.com/forums/image.php?u=4345&type=sigpic&dateline=1228940259 target=_blank>http://www.worldnavalships.com/forum...ine=1228940259</a>

Battlecruiser Renown in 1936 - looking as splendid as ever.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 10-07-2014, 06:05
jainso31 jainso31 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DONCASTER S.YORKS UK
Posts: 8,748
Default Re: "Duel off Stromvaer" - Renown vs. Gneisenau & Scharnhorst

Quote Monty

"But it would certainly have suited British 'strategic intentions' if one or both of the German battleships had failed to make it back to port".

Unfortunate that was ,at the time,something we were unable to do;although Renown had tried hard enough.She hit Gneisenau- but failed to stop/slow down or otherwise put her in a position- where she could have sunk the German battlecruiser.

jainso31
Reply With Quote
Reply



Ship Search by Name : Advanced Search
Random Timeline Entry : 2nd January 1939 : HMS Ilex : Sailed Harwich for Plymouth

NAVAL PRINTS

Click above to see our naval art portal - Eight random half price items are displayed to the right.

Some Current Half Price Offers

At 12.30pm on the 21st of October 1805, Admiral Lord Nelson on board his flagship, HMS Victory, breaks the line of the combined French and Spanish fleets.  The Victory is delivering a devastating stern rake to the 80 gun French ship Bucentaure, the flagship of the combined fleets, commanded by Vice-Admiral P. C. J. B. S. Villeneuve.  Starboard to the Victory is the 74 gun Redoutable.  This ship, the Victory and HMS Temeraire, seen left, became locked together soon after, the unequal exchange resulting in the Redoutable having the highest casualties during the entire battle.

Breaking the Line at the Battle of Trafalgar by Graeme Lothian
Half Price! - £50.00
Americas first true aircraft carrier, the USS Langley (CV-1) is pictured making way at sea as a pair of Douglas DT-2s pass overhead.

USS Langley by Ivan Berryman (AP)
Half Price! - £37.50
 Erich Topps notorious Red Devil Boat, U-552, slips quietly away from the scene of another victory in the North Atlantic in 1941.

U-552 by Ivan Berryman.
Half Price! - £65.00
B216P.  HMS Colossus by Ivan Berryman. Together with her sister ship, Hercules, HMS Colossus acquitted herself well at the Battle of Jutland where she fired 93 12in rounds, but received only two hits from enemy fire which caused minor damage and left nine crew injured.  She was sold for scrap in 1928.

HMS Colossus by Ivan Berryman (P)
Half Price! - £500.00

 Under tow, HMS Vanguard having left John Brown shipyard, passes Dalmuir ship docks, Clydebank, 1946. HMS Vanguard would be the last British battleship to be built.

HMS Vanguard, Away the Vanguard by Randall Wilson. (Y)
Half Price! - £60.00
 The submarine depot ship HMS Maidstone is pictured off Hong Kong with a quintet of British submarines alongside for replenishment, namely (left to right) an S-class, a U-class, a T-class and two more U-class.

HMS Maidstone by Ivan Berryman (P)
Half Price! - £450.00
 The allied invasion of Normandy Operation Overlord was the greatest sea-bourne military operation in history. Key to its success and at the heart of the invasion were the Landings of the British 50th division on Gold beach and the Canadian 3rd Division on Juno beach. They provided a vital link between the landings of the British 3rd Division on Sword beach and the Americans on Omaha and Utah beaches. They were also crucial in securing the beachhead and the drive inland to Bayeux and Caen.
Glosters Return by David Griffin (Y)
Half Price! - £40.00
 The Dido class cruiser HMS Naiad is pictured together with the cruiser HMS Leander during the encounter with the French Guepard in 1941 whilst they were both engaged in operations against the Vichy-French forces in Syria.

HMS Naiad by Ivan Berryman (AP)
Half Price! - £25.00

SPORT PRINTS

Click above to see our sport art portal - Four random half price items are displayed to the right.

Some Current Half Price Offers

SFA7.  Galileo by Stephen Smith.

Galileo by Stephen Smith.
Half Price! - £70.00
 England 53 - South Africa 3, Twickenham, Novermber 23rd 2002. England: Robinson, Cohen, Tindall, Greenwood, Christophers, Wilkinson, Dawson, Vickery, Leonard, Thompson, Johnson, Kay, Moody, Back, Hill. (Subs): Dallaglio, Gomersall, Healey, Morris, Regan, Stimpson. Scores: Try - Cohen, 2 Tries - Greenwood, Try - Back, Try - Hill, Try - Dallaglio, Penalty Try, 2 Penalties - Wilkinson, Conversion - Wilkinson, Conversion - Dawson, 2 Conversions - Gomersall, 2 Conversions - Stimpson. <br><br>South Africa: Greef, Paulse, Fleck, James, Lombard, Pretorius, Conradie, Roux, Dalton, Venter, Lambuschagne, Krige, Wannenburg, Van Niekerk. (Subs): Jacobs, Jordaan, Russell, Uys, Van Biljon, Van der Linde, Wentzel. Score : Penalty - Pretorius.

England v South Africa - Investec 2002 by Doug Harker. (Y)
Half Price! - £100.00


Jason Leonard by Robert Highton. (Y)
Half Price! - £80.00
 England Captain martin Johnson lifts the World Rugby Cup, as winners of the 2003 World Rugby Cup in Australia.

Martin Johnson by Chris Howells.
Half Price! - £45.00

AVIATION PRINTS

Click above to see our aviation art portal - Four random half price items are displayed to the right.

Some Current Half Price Offers

 For Manfred von Richthofen, the air battle in the skies west of Amiens on 20th April 1918 was to yield a final two victories to add to the seventy eight with which he was already credited.  But these were to be his last, the Red Baron finally succumbing the following day.  Just moments before Second Lieutenant David Lewis' 3 Sqn Sopwith Camel fell to the German's guns (the young pilot surviving to tell his story of being the Red Baron's final victim), Major Richard Raymond-Barker was not so lucky, his aircraft burning furiously until it hit the ground in a fireball near the Forest of Hamel.

The 79th Victory by Ivan Berryman. (P)
Half Price! - £650.00
 A tribute to the glider crews and airborne troops who participated in the glider operations during D-Day.  The British Horsa glider (known as the flying coffin) was used by British, Canadian and American airborne forces during the invasion.  Approximately 100 glider pilots were killed or wounded during the D-Day operations.

D-Day Invasion : Tribute to the Glider Troops by Ivan Berryman. (P)
Half Price! - £550.00
 Lancasters of 61 Squadron head out for the enemy coast during the night of 3rd November 1943. Seen in the lead Lancaster is Flt Lt Bill Reid flying QR-O. After sustaining two heavy attacks by enemy night fighters, killing two crew members and injuring Reid in the head, shoulders and hands. He carried on to the target, dropping accurately his bomb load. Navigating back by Pole Star and Moon, he lost consciousness on occasions due to blood loss. He managed to find his way Shipdharn. Upon landing the undercarriage collapsed but luckily did not catch fire. For his exploits that night he was awarded the Victoria Cross.

Lancaster VC by Graeme Lothian. (Y)
Half Price! - £240.00
 An SAS team is picked up by a U.S. Army Special Forces Blackhawk helicopter after a successful operation against the Taliban.

Extraction - Afghanistan 2011 by David Pentland.
Half Price! - £70.00

MILITARY PRINTS

Click above to see our military art portal - Four random half price items are displayed to the right.

Some Current Half Price Offers

 Sturmtigers of Sturmmorser Company 1002, commanded by Lieutenant Zippel, take on ammunition in preparation for the battle to come. These fearsome monsters 38cm rocket projectors could penetrate up to 2.5m of reinforced concrete. Luckily for the Allies only 18 were completed by the wars end.

Preparing for the Day, the Reichswald, February 1945 by David Pentland.
Half Price! - £90.00
 1st Battalion in action at Escaut Canal, Belgium, May 1940. The last Highland Regiment to wear a kilt in battle, attacking the Germans at the River Escaut.  From the Diary of Captain R. Leah, 1st Battalion, Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders : Tuesday 21st May : Bn left Ere about 2 a.m. to march back. Fortunately Coy Cmdr. were required for some sort of recce and we went in C.O.s car.  Arrived Taintignies 3 a.m. and self went out again with Wilkie in C.O.s car to look for for C Coy which had gone astray, and to see Q.M. about Bn rations in Wez-Velvain.  Could not find either.  Met the Battalion arriving from Ere when I left the village at 3 a.m.  Got back myself at 4 a.m. found empty house which I entered by window and slept well for 5 hours. Officers mess going in house beside M.T. park, and had good breakfast.  Fairly quiet morning and orders to move this afternoon to Bn assembly position S of Wez-Velvain.  Thence we were directed to Merlin and prepared for counter-attack to drive enemy off Western side of Escaut.

The Charge of the 1st Battalion Queens Own Cameron Highlanders by David Rowlands (AP)
Half Price! - £50.00
 Vielsalm, Belgium, 22nd December 1944.  Men of the 508th PIR, along with the rest of the 82nd Airborne Division were rushed to the Ardennes and deployed in an attempt to halt the onslaught of 6th SS Panzer Army, specifically Kampfgruppe Peiper.

Holding the Line by David Pentland.
Half Price! - £70.00
 British MK1 Grant tanks of the Staffordshire Yeomanry 8th Armoured Brigade, 10th Armoured Division, breakout from El Alamein.

Operation Supercharge, 4th November 1941 by David Pentland. (GS)
Half Price! - £250.00
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Aircraft Carriers "Joffre" and "Painleve" Grosser Kreuzer French Ships and Crews 9 13-10-2014 17:25
DD 110, a "Fourstacker" "Flush Decker" John Odom US Navy Ships and Crews 4 28-03-2013 10:12
Scharnhorst and Gneisenau NASAAN101 German Ships and Crews 52 20-05-2010 10:39
Scharnhorst and Gneisenau Vs. HMS Rawalpindi NASAAN101 German Ships and Crews 12 04-03-2009 18:12


All times are GMT. The time now is 21:24.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.