The title says it all. What would happen to the British if they had lost a battle decisively to the German Navy during WW1? IOTL the British suffered heavier losses at Jutland than the Germans did. Lets say that got multiplied and it was most definitely a defeat.
Decisive German Naval Victory in WW1
- Thread starter Thucydides
- Start date
It would, IMHO, be ASB to inflict enough damage to change the result. The RN is just to large
It is certainly possible for the Germans to do better at Jutland than they did in OTL; after all, the British fleet did better on a tactical level than the Germans. However, I do have to agree with Orry that any realistic result is not going to hurt the British enough to critically weaken their naval superiority. One thing the OTL Battle of Jutland demonstrated quite clearly is that Dreadnoughts can take an impressive amount of punishment while still remaining semi-seaworthy. The Germans might be able to put several British Dreadnoughts into drydock for months, but managing to sink a significant number of them could be difficult.
Most likely, after a German victory at Jutland we see the British blockade get a bit looser for a few months until the damaged/lost ships can be repaired/replaced. British naval force in other areas might also get a bit weaker, if ships get pulled out in order to reinforce the fleet in the North Sea.
British and Entente morale will take a hit from a naval defeat, but it probably won't be an insurmountable issue. Unrestricted Submarine Warfare might also lose popularity in Germany if the Germans manage a naval victory; OTL one of the main reasons for USW was a perceived need to hit back at Britain on the seas.
Most likely, after a German victory at Jutland we see the British blockade get a bit looser for a few months until the damaged/lost ships can be repaired/replaced. British naval force in other areas might also get a bit weaker, if ships get pulled out in order to reinforce the fleet in the North Sea.
British and Entente morale will take a hit from a naval defeat, but it probably won't be an insurmountable issue. Unrestricted Submarine Warfare might also lose popularity in Germany if the Germans manage a naval victory; OTL one of the main reasons for USW was a perceived need to hit back at Britain on the seas.
I think that I tried this earlier in this thread. It is just possible for the British to suffer heavy losses at Jutland, especially as the main fleets encountered each other as the light was failing on a misty day. There could be a huge swarm of butterflies released although it is very unlikely that the British would lose control of the North Sea.
Adler
Banned
There is a quiete easy way for the Germans to win this battle decisively. Yes, everything was true concerning the dreadnoughts. But it is also true they were vulnerable against torpedoes. If the German destroyer found the British battlefleet in the night while running south and they then managed to make a massive torpedo attack, they would have sunk or crippled enough ships that the following German battlefleet might take out some of the crippled ones, too.
If such a massive strike happened, the RN would lose, let's guess, 12 battleships. After such a battle there would be nearly equal forces on both sides of the North Sea. That would have lead to a massive shift in the war. The RN had to be closer to their coast to fight the danger of an invasion, even if it would be only the fear of. So more men would be used to man garrisons in England, and not to fight in France. The Channel might now see more fights with perhaps German sorties into it.
With one word Britain would lose the war, if not now then in 1917, when the Germans could then overwhelm the French and British forces at last.
Adler
If such a massive strike happened, the RN would lose, let's guess, 12 battleships. After such a battle there would be nearly equal forces on both sides of the North Sea. That would have lead to a massive shift in the war. The RN had to be closer to their coast to fight the danger of an invasion, even if it would be only the fear of. So more men would be used to man garrisons in England, and not to fight in France. The Channel might now see more fights with perhaps German sorties into it.
With one word Britain would lose the war, if not now then in 1917, when the Germans could then overwhelm the French and British forces at last.
Adler
unlikely
The british also had more torpedo-boat destroyers than the germans had torpedo boats
British
28 battleships
9 battlecruisers
8 armoured cruisers
26 light cruisers
78 destroyers
1 minelayer
1 seaplane carrier
Germans
16 battleships
5 battlecruisers
6 pre-dreadnoughts
11 light cruisers
61 torpedo-boats
wi somehow the Germans found out about Room 40 code breaking.
I wonder if the play for Jutland, essentilaly the whole High Seas Fleet gets a go at the Battle Cruisers and the 5th Battle Squadron (very modern Battle ships) well, given the problmes Battle Cruisers had in OTL...)
I wonder if the play for Jutland, essentilaly the whole High Seas Fleet gets a go at the Battle Cruisers and the 5th Battle Squadron (very modern Battle ships) well, given the problmes Battle Cruisers had in OTL...)
I doubt Britain would draw enough troops out for the war to be lost. Besides the British would probably draw troops from colonial positions (or maybe the Ottoman front) rather than France, which if lost would be as bad as an invasion.
No there isn't.
How?
Individual warships and squadrons from both fleets blundered into each other, slipped past each other, and fired at each other throughout the night after Jutland and nothing like you suggest could have so easily occurred actually did occur.
The HSF destroyer squadrons and other light forces were heavily outnumbered by their Grand Fleet counterparts. The HSF light forces were also in the wrong location to intercept, let alone detect, the Grand Fleet's battle squadrons. And detecting targets well enough to launch torpedoes on a good night, let alone the kind of night after Jutland, was not a trivial task during this period either.
Jellicoe was actually ahead of the HSF as the Germans ran back to the safety of the Jade and Room 40 knew it. Only poor intel coordination on Britain's part saved the HSF from having to face the Grand Fleet's gunline in order to scurry home.
The fact that is far too often overlooked in these threads is that HSF was already amazingly lucky before, during, and after Jutland and so much so that adding to the HSF's luck begins to push the edges of the plausibility. Relatively tiny changes on Britain's part like Jellicoe's pre-war memo about testing battleship shells being acted upon or Beatty's wife not having a soft spot for a certain criminally incompetent signals officer could have resulted in the HSF being trashed.
It's rather telling that after the battle and despite the many lucky breaks the HSF enjoyed, Jellicoe told his government the Grand Fleet could sortie again in 48 hours while Scheer told his government the HSF could not sortie again for months.
Jutland isn't a case of the HSF only needing a little more luck to win, Jutland is a case of the HSF being lucky enough not to be destroyed.
Jutland is to late but the Raid on Scarborough provided an excellent opportunity to even the odds early on. In the short run its possible Germany can weaken the blockade against her but that in and of itself won't be a war winner. In the long run such a victory leads Britain to use her superior ship building capacity to regain naval supremacy and the Germans probably scrap their U-boat program and focus on building battleships, possibly butterflying American entry and leading to a German victory in 1917.
An excellent point about an extraordinary series of events. The results of the OTL raid are seemingly balanced on a knife blade. Hipper and Ingenohl had an equal chance of trapping Warrender as Beatty and Warrender had of trapping Hipper.
The blockade won't be weakened at all as the HSF still can't force either the Channel or the northern entrances to the North Sea. Things will hotter for the Harwich Force and more fast raids on eastern Britain may occur but, as you point out, Britain can and will build soon enough to restore her numerical advantage.
A conventional naval victory which does little or nothing to effect the Entente blockade might push Germany towards a USW campaign even earlier.
Yeah the OTL battle could've gone disasterously for either side but it was the single best chance for the Germans to inflict a severe blow on the RN probably throughout the entire war.
This is true though with more raids in hope of repeating their success you'd have to see the Germans do their best to match the British build up.
I get your point, but I'm not sure as an early decisive HSF victory over the vaunted Royal Navy would lend creedence to a more aggressive use of the HSF which would mean in the long run choosing Battleships over U-boats.
But it wouldn't be decisive, would it? The bulk of the Grand Fleet remains and the blockade is still in place. The HSF bagged some battlecruisers and battleships and there was no true change in the strategic situation.
More aggressive use means more chances for the HSF to lose and lose badly.
If victories by battleships haven't redressed the strategic situation, why would more victories by battleships somehow be different?
The HSF doesn't need to win one "Scarborough" encounter, it needs to win 3 or 4 in a row.
The problem was that the German goal was to ambush a portion of the British fleet with their full strength and the moment they realized that it was the British ambushing them the goal became an immediate retreat to Germany, not trying to force the battle.
Decisive in the tactical rather than the strategic sense
True, but also more chances to win. Given the Germans qualitive superiority in the design of their warships and production of munitions not to mention night fighting tactics, the Germans could be forgiven for the thought that they could inflict massive casualties in comparison to those received.
Its true that one victory wouldn't do the trick but thats no reason for the HSF to throw in the towel.
Again correct and winning that much against the RN won't happen, but thats 20/20 hindsight the Germans may win enough to think they can actually defeat the RN in such a manner(not the first time and underdog would make that mistake). I know the RN wouldn't be foolish enough to allow this even if they had to abandon much of the east coast of England to the occasional bombardment or more likely to massive fortification.
Given the results of the night fighting which occurred after Jutland, I've understandable concerns about the constant references to WW1 German naval night fighting capabilities on these boards.
They had that belief in the OTL and, in a handful of encounters, never quite managed to pull it off. Then, after May 31st/June 1st 1916 they never really tried to pull it off again.
You're very correct when you suggest that one success will lead to future attempts. However one success won't necessarily lead to future successes and the HSF will more plausibly find itself in the same situation it faced in the OTL: Rusting away at anchor while locked in port by both the distant Grand Fleet and the Kaiser's fears.
I'm not suggesting they immediately throw in the towel. After all, they didn't in the OTL after several near misses until the incredibly lucky escape at Jutland scared the bejabbers out of any thoughtful HSF officer.
I am suggesting that an early success by the HSF may lead to more attempts by the HSF which could very well lead to a disaster for the HSF.
The Grand Fleet's "failure" at Jutland prompted all sorts of organizational and other improvements in the RN not the least of which involved Room 40 and redesigned shells. An earlier defeat at Scarborough won't provide the HSF with numerical parity and will provide the RN with the same impetus it had after Jutland.
Increased hubris on the part of the HSF, a numerical advantage still on the RN's part, a Room 40 still working and being paid attention to, and earlier improvements by the RN to things like shells and signaling could add up to a disaster for Germany.