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: 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: 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: 1,254
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: 104
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: 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 offline
Vice Commodore
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Newfoundland, Canada
Posts: 737
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 : 22nd January 1940 : HMS Beagle : Detached from Convoy OA.96

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

 Shows the action on 26th May 1941 by Swordfish from HMS Ark Royal on the German battleship Bismarck. Fresh from her triumphant encounter with HMS Hood, Bismarck was struck by Swordfishs torpedo which jammed her rudder and was finished off by the home fleet on 27th May 1941.
Sink the Bismarck by Geoff Lea. (Y)
Half Price! - £50.00
B216AP.  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 (AP)
Half Price! - £45.00
B103AP.  HMS Royal Sovereign and HMS Warspite departing Malta by Ivan Berryman.

HMS Royal Sovereign and HMS Warspite departing Malta by Ivan Berryman (AP)
Half Price! - £25.00
  D for Donald of 270 squadron, Royal Air Force, out of Freetown, West Africa operating in the Atlantic Ocean. It was during routine operation search that D for Donald surprised U515 on the surface and immediately attacked the submarine. U515 in putting up stiff resistance blew a large hole in the hull of D for Donald and the magazine of the starboard side 0.5 twin Browning was hit and the subsequent shrapnel wounded both blister gunners. U515 escaped but was sunk by an American naval hunter group a year later. D for Donald limped back to base and managed to make the beach before it would sink completely.
Catalina Attack by John Wynne Hopkins (B)
Half Price! - £80.00

 Forming part of the Eastern Task Force covering the landings at Normandy in June 1944, the cruiser HMS Mauritius is shown in company with the monitor HMS Roberts and the cruiser HMS Frobisher shelling German batteries at Merville, Houlgate and Benerville as the combined British and American forces embark upon what would become known forever as D-Day.

Operation Neptune by Ivan Berryman.
Half Price! - £15.00
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 (Y)
Half Price! - £50.00
  HMS Norfolk and HMS Belfast of Force I are shown engaging the Scharnhorst which has already been hit and disabled by both HMS Duke of York and the cruiser HMS Jamaica.  Scharnhorst was never to escape the clutches of the British and Norwegian forces for, having been slowed to just a few knots by numerous hits, fell victim to repeated torpedo attacks by the allied cruisers and destroyers that had trapped the German marauder.

HMS Norfolk at the Battle of the North Cape by Ivan Berryman (P)
Half Price! - £425.00
 Mitsubishi G4Ms of 27 Kanoya Kokutai begin their devastating attack on Force Z off the north east coast of Malaya on 10th December 1941. Both Repulse and prince of Wales were lost in the attack, while their accompanying destroyers remained to pick up survivors among them HMS Express which can be seen off HMS Repulse starboard quarter.

HMS Repulse with HMS Prince of Wales Under Attack by Ivan Berryman. (Y)
Half Price! - £55.00

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

 Colin McRae and Nicky Grist.  Ford Focus WRC
High Flier by Michael Thompson.
Half Price! - £30.00
Champion racing horse West Tip at Cheltenham race course.

West Tip by Mark Churms.
Half Price! - £20.00
Marcus Gronholm wins the 2002 Rally New Zealand in the Peugeot 206 and gains the World Rally Championship Title, October 2002.
Finnish First by Graham Bosworth. (Y)
Half Price! - £100.00
FAR635. Muirfield - 13th Hole by Mark Chadwick

Muirfield - 13th Hole by Mark Chadwick
Half Price! - £20.00

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

 Flying Officer Tom Neil closes on a Dornier Do.17 on 15th September 1940, just one of four victories confirmed on that day, the others being two Bf.109s and another Dornier shared.  He is depicted flying Hurricane Mk1 V7313 of 249 Sqn whilst based at North Weald.

Tribute to Fl Off Tom Neil by Ivan Berryman. (P)
Half Price! - £750.00
 An Avro Anson comes under attack from an Me109.

Avro Anson by Ivan Berryman. (AP)
Half Price! - £52.50
 The Royal Air Force Aerobatic Team, The Red Arrows, perform a roll in Lancaster formation over their base at RAF Scampton, the spiritual home of the famous 617 Squadron Dambusters Lancasters.  Each print is signed by the 2009 Red Arrows Team.

The Spirit of Scampton by Roy Garner. (Y)
Half Price! - £30.00
Mosquitos of 105 Squadron, Marham.  No. 105 Squadron, stationed at Marham, Norfolk, became the first Royal Air Force unit to become operational flying the Mosquito B. Mk. IV bomber on 11th April 1942.  The painting shows 105 Squadron on the raid of 10th April 1945, to the Wahren railway marshalling yards at Leipzig, Germany.

Return From Leipzig by Anthony Saunders. (Y)
Half Price! - £20.00

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

 US Marines of the 2nd Battalion, 2nd RCT, 2nd Marine Division, supported by LVTs and tanks, take part in the successful but bloody assault on Betio Island, part of the Tarawa Atoll. Operation Galvanic as it was known became the first step on the island road to Japan itself.

Red Beach Two, Tarawa Atoll, 20th November 1943 by David Pentland. (GL)
Half Price! - £300.00
 After suppressing the initial German defences, the Sherman Crab flail tank of Lance Sgt Johnson, 3 Troop C Squadron the 22nd Dragoons, 79th Armoured Division,  clears a path through a minefield to allow tanks of 27th Armoured Brigade, and men of 3rd Infantry Division to breakout  from the beaches. Fire support from surviving Sherman DD (amphibious) tanks of 13th /18th Hussars (QMO), proved invaluable in the initial push towards Caen

D-Day, Sword Beach, Normandy 1944 by David Pentland. (GS)
Half Price! - £250.00
 Commandos of 1st Special Service Brigade, led by Lord Lovat, are piped past the defenders of the Caen canal (Pegasus) bridge by piper Bill Millin. The bridge was originally taken in a coup de main attack by the gliders of 6th Airborne Divisions D Company, 2nd battalion Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Light Infantry, led by Major John Howard earlier that morning. Shortly afterwards the glider troops were reinforced by 7 Parachute Battalion, and together they held the area against German attacks until the main British forces landing at Sword beach could fight through to join them.

Piper Bill, Pegasus Bridge, Normandy, 13.00hrs, 6th June 1944 by David Pentland. (Y)
Half Price! - £50.00
 Trapped within a rapidly decreasing perimeter, the exhausted BEF along with elements of the French 1st Army appeared to be at the mercy of the mighty Luftwaffe. No one though had reckoned on the brilliant leadership of Admiral Ramsay nor the gallant and unstinting efforts of the military and civilians who managed to rescue over 330,000 troops in nine days.

Operation Dynamo, Dunkirk, France 24th May - 4th June 1940 by David Pentland. (Y)
Half Price! - £50.00
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 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 07:13.


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