Admiral Patey catched von Spee in the Marquesas

Admiral Patey’s force was one of those searching for von Spee and Patey had information that he would be in the Marquesas, however, the Admiralty interfered and ordered him off on a wild goose chase elsewhere.

I understand that if Patey had not been ordered elsewhere, he would have intercepted von Spee on or about 24 September with:

HMAS Australia
MN Montcalm
HMAS Sydney
HMAS Encounter

Von Spee would have had Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, the three light cruisers not having joined him at this time.

What are the likely results of a battle at this time between these two forces?
 
An interesting proposal. If Spee scatters, then I believe Montcalm and Encounter are too slow to catch anything. Australia would catch one of the armored cruisers, short of unforeseen circumstances, and I don't see that as anything but a sink for Patey. Sydney could catch the other cruiser Spee has , but if she catches the other armored cruiser, I would think that Spee would sink the Sydney.
 
Yep so Australia scalps one doing the job she was designed for

Sydney 'shadows' the remaining unit using her speed to remain out of gun range and hopefully remain in contact until Australia catches up and 'joins' the 2nd Armoured Cruiser with her sister

No need for Sydney to get scratched - just do her job and keep tabs on the 2nd German Ship

The other 2 ships are a liability - slower than the Armoured Cruisers and obsolete in every aspect - I suspect that they would remain in touch with Australia and one of them would collect survivors from the 1st Armoured Cruiser after it is sunk and the 2nd once the 2nd is sunk!

However if darkness threatened to intervene before the Australia could dispatch the first ships and return for the 2nd then Sydney would have to make an attempt to engage the 2nd unit on her on her own or possibly in company with the other 2 second line 'protected' Cruisers.

The issue here is that while Sydneys 6"/50 cals were good guns they would not penetrate the turret faces or main belt of a Scharnhorst class Cruiser (but would be effective in all other locations) while the German ships 8.3"/40 guns did not suffer the same issue - Sydney would get the worst of the exchange I suspect but as they say - if you cannot take a joke then you shouldn't have joined the Navy

However any serious damage to the German ship is effectively permanent as there is no where to make repairs and I suspect that their lordships at the Admiralty would 'gladly' swap all 3 Crusiers for both German ships and sleep all the more soundly for it at night.
 
Unless there is a real cock up, there in no Coronel and Craddock will still be alive. Does he stay in the South Atlantic or does he come back to the UK for a new command?
 

Coulsdon Eagle

Monthly Donor
Two RN battlecruisers took an age to sink Scharnhorst & Gneisenau at the Falklands, and Invincible nearly suffered a fatal magazine pentration. On what grounds should we believe that one similar 12"-gunned Australia would do any better? And Von Spee would have full magazines, having not used a large proportion of his ammunition at Coronel.

On balance I would go for one damaged Australia against at best one sunk German armoured cruiser with the other limping away in a battered state. The fate of the light cruisers would depend upon whether Patey sends all his supporting cruisers after them or retains (say) Montcalm to take on Von Spee 2 against 2.
 
Two RN battlecruisers took an age to sink Scharnhorst & Gneisenau at the Falklands, and Invincible nearly suffered a fatal magazine pentration. On what grounds should we believe that one similar 12"-gunned Australia would do any better? And Von Spee would have full magazines, having not used a large proportion of his ammunition at Coronel.

On balance I would go for one damaged Australia against at best one sunk German armoured cruiser with the other limping away in a battered state. The fate of the light cruisers would depend upon whether Patey sends all his supporting cruisers after them or retains (say) Montcalm to take on Von Spee 2 against 2.

At Falklands the British had to chase down the German ships and the 'Near fatal magazine penetration' of Invincibility that you speak of was a flooded coal bunker 'near' P Turret!

The inaccuracy of the ships firing was put down to lack of fire control tables on either ship at the time, firing at long range (16,000 yards for much of the battle), the Germans had fled 'up wind' so the smoke from the British funnels and guns obscured the target, because it was a stern chase the tilt effect of the ships roll combined with the elevation of the guns would massively affect the accuracy of the shells if not fired at exactly 0 degrees roll. Also the Germans 'very sneakily' and 'unsportingly' made minute zig zags of no more than a few degrees Port / Starboard of their mean heading (which was difficult to spot with the then directors) to throw of the British ships aim - and the British ships eventually had to resort to firing on a said mean heading enabling a hit 'every now and then'.

These problems existed for everyone in 1914

To give you an indication of how difficult such shooting is consider the then state of the art Battleships Iowa and New Jersey's failed attempts to hit the fleeing IJN Destroyer Nowaki in a similar action off Truk in 44
 
Top