World Naval Ships Forums  
CURRENT SPECIAL OFFERS ON OUR HUGE SELECTION OF 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: 282
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: 282
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: 142
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: 142
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, 14:41
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, 09:50
Rupert Rupert is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,229
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, 17:15
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 18:08.
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: 102
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 online now
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Arundel, Sussex
Posts: 200
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: 282
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: 282
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 online now
Vice Commodore
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
Posts: 727
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 : 23rd January 1937 : HMS Blanche : Arrived Portsmouth

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

The Pedestal Convoy of August 1942 was one of the most heavily protected convoys in the history of sea warfare.  Fourteen of the fastest cargo ships of the time were protected by 4 carriers, 2 battleships, 7 cruisers and 32 destroyers.  The destroyer HMS Ashanti is in the foreground of the painting.  Also depicted are the carrier HMS Indomitable, with her Hurricanes cirling the convoy overhead, and the cargoe ship Port Chalmers to the right of the picture.

Pedestal Convoy by Anthony Saunders (B)
Half Price! - £20.00
 Type 21 frigate HMS Ambuscade (F172) is shown passing the swing bridge as she enters Taranto Harbour.

HMS Ambuscade by Ivan Berryman (P)
Half Price! - £500.00
The King George V class battleship HMS Anson is pictured in Sydney Harbour where she joined the Pacific Fleet in July 1945, viewed across the flight deck of HMS Vengeance, where ten of her Vought F4.U Corsairs are ranged in front of a single folded Fairey Barracuda
HMS Anson at Sydney Harbour, July 1945 by Ivan Berryman.
Half Price! - £50.00
HMS Ark Royal after a recent refit, rejoins the fleet in 2001.

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

 The Queen Elizabeth class battleship HMS Malaya is pictured at Capetown in April 1942 en route to Durban from Gibraltar. A veteran of the First World War, Malaya took part in the Battle of Jutland, receiving eight hits, and going on to serve throughout World War Two, surviving a torpedo off Cape Verde in 1941. She is seen here about to recover her Fairey Swordfish floatplane beneath the dramatic outline of Table Mountain.

HMS Malaya at Capetown, South Africa. by Ivan Berryman (Y)
Half Price! - £70.00
 Grand Harbour, Malta, April 1932. The R-Class battleship HMS Revenge slips majestically past the carrier HMS Furious as she lies at anchor as three of her Fairey IIIFs fly overhead on a routine training sortie.

HMS Furious with HMS Revenge by Ivan Berryman. (Y)
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
Wednesday, April 10th, 1912. The mighty liner Titanic is shown at anchor in Cherbourg Harbour, all lights ablaze.  Due to her size, she can't pull into port as the piers are too small.  Instead, she is anchored offshore.  Cherbourg passengers finally board tenders and wait to be ferried out to Titanic.  Mail is brought aboard.  By 8:30 p.m. the anchor is raised and the Titanic leaves for Queenstown, Ireland.

RMS Titanic at Cherbourg by Ivan Berryman. (Y)
Half Price! - £40.00

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

 England 1 Germany 0, Euro 2000.  On the 17th of June 2000 England once again faced their old nemesis Germany in a Group A qualifying match at Euro 2000.  England entered the game knowing that they had not defeated Germany in a competitive match since the famous World Cup victory in 1966.  Germany made four changes to the side that had drawn with Romania including the introduction of midfielder Sebastian Deisler, whilst England had been forced to replace Tony Adams and Steve McManaman with Martin Keown and Dennis Wise due to injury.  As expected the game started at a frenetic pace and Jancker made things difficult for England's central defenders early on with his height and strength.  England appeared to be lacking cohesion and allowed Germany to take control of the game.  Deisler brought the German crowd to their feet with a clever run down the right hand side and minutes later Hamaan had their first strike on goal which was hit directly at David Seaman.  England were looking for a flash of inspiration and it was very nearly delivered as Michael Owen managed to meet Phil Neville's cross with his head but only managed to direct the ball on to the post.  Paul Scholes in typical fashion drove a ferocious volley, which was tipped just over the bar, and suddenly it appeared that England were beginning to find some weaknesses in certain areas of the German side.  At the interval little separated the two sides however, England started the second half with a steely determination.  After just seven minutes David Beckham earned his side a free kick in a very dangerous position on the England right.  With good movement from the forwards in the German area Beckham swung a speculative cross into the six yard box.  Owen, beaten by the pace, failed to connect but man of the match Alan Shearer anticipated the kind bounce and without hesitation headed the ball back across Kahn and into the right hand side of the German goal.  The England captain had broken the deadlock and instilled in his side the belief that they could finally defeat their oldest rivals.  Germany threw everything they had at England but Keegan's team were equal to the task in every area of the pitch.  As the final whistle blew a huge roar erupted from the England supporters as Alan Shearer's goal had ended over thirty years of frustration and sealed his place in the history books as one of England's greatest ever strikers.

Perfect Finish by Peter Cornwell.
Half Price! - £50.00
 Jenson Button.  Reanult R202
Young Gun by Michael Thompson.
Half Price! - £30.00
 The Welsh Six Nations Grand Slam of 2005 is completed as Wales beat Ireland in their final game. <br>Results : Cardiff, 5th February : Wales 11 - 9 England<br>Rome, 12th February : Italy 8 - 38 Wales<br>Paris, 26th February : France 18 - 24 Wales<br>Edinburgh, 13th March : Scotland 22 - 46 Wales<br>Cardiff, 19th March : Wales 32 - 20 Ireland.

Grand Slam 2005 by James Owen. (Y)
Half Price! - £60.00
B45. David Coulthard/ Williams FW.17 by Ivan Berryman

David Coulthard/ Williams FW.17 by Ivan Berryman
Half Price! - £40.00

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

 An Avro Anson comes under attack from an Me109.

Avro Anson by Ivan Berryman.
Half Price! - £40.00
 Westland Wessex of No.72 Squadron based at RAF Aldergrove, flying over the Copeland Islands in Belfast Lough.

Wessex Over the Copelands by David Pentland.
Half Price! - £35.00
 Fw190A-4/U8 night bomber variant of SKG.10.

Focke Wulf Fw190A-4/U8 by Ivan Berryman.
Half Price! - £70.00
Hurricane LK-M of No.87 Squadron piloted by Flt Lt Alex Thom DFC limps over the south coast of England on 19th August 1942. While supporting troops on the ground at Dieppe, the Hurricane was hit by ground fire and lost oil pressure. Alex Thom got the damaged aircraft back to Britain, making a forced landing at East Den. Ferried back to 87 Sqn's airfield, he immediately set off once more for Dieppe in Hurricane LK-A.

A Welcome Shore by Ivan Berryman. (AP)
Half Price! - £90.00

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

 Near Caen, D-Day, 6th June 1944.  Vickers heavy machinegun team of the British 3rd Division, <i>Monty's Ironsides</i>, in action against the German strong points Morris and Hillman.  The division comprised of the 2nd East Yorkshires, 1st South Lancashires, 1st Suffolks, 2nd Lincolnshires, 1st King's Own Scottish Borderers, 2nd Royal Ulster Rifles, 2nd Warwickshires, 1st Norfolks, and 2nd King's Shropshire Light Infantry.

Morris and Hillman by David Pentland. (P)
Half Price! - £700.00
 Jagdpanthers of 654 heavy Tank Battalion engage 6th Guards Tank Brigade Churchills.
Debut at Caumont, Normandy, 30th July 1944 by David Pentland. (D)
Half Price! - £70.00
 Panzer v Ausf. D Panthers of SS Panther Division Das Reich make their debut during the initial stages of the German summer offensive for Kursk. This unit with others of the SS Panzer Korps made the deepest advances into the well-prepared Soviet lines. Complete success however, was to elude them when outrunning their supporting divisions at Prokhorovka they were forced to halt for six days.

Operation Zitadelle by David Pentland. (GL)
Half Price! - £300.00
 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
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 11:12
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 19:12


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:55.


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