Yes. Since it has marines aboard.
Apparently the pre-dreadnought HMS Albion was stationed at Walvis Bay from October to November 1914. Not sure what that says about the port facilities there though.
Last edited:
Germany sends Blucher to Kamerun at war start
- Thread starter Catspoke
- Start date
Apparently the pre-dreadnought HMS Albion was stationed at Walvis Bay from October to November 1914. Not sure what that says about the port facilities there though.
By some quirk of history Walvis Bay was a British enclave on the coast of German South West Afrika. It was also the German Colony's only viable port.
I was thinking if you get past the British Isles by war start, you may get to Kamerun within a few days of war start worst case. Might have to have coal in the Canaries, might be good to get there at least before war start.
This is all mooted by the point about the depth of the estuary or lack thereof for a Blucher.
And as pointed out Southwest Africa has pretty poor ports for this sort of thing. What ports are good anywhere, might have to go to the Pacific, Tsingtao, Rabaul, Samoa???
Thanks for that, the only conflicting report is the British cruiser Cumberland, draught 25 feet entered the port to support the operation to take it in September 1914. Blucher is 29 feet, you may still be correct, the older German ACs would be in reserve at the beginning of the war so even if they had a shallower draft, wouldn't be ready to go probably.
The hope is that Blucher present would delay the fall of the port at least to Bluchers OTL destruction date. And the fact that 10 German merchant ships were captured when the port fell, perhaps enough supplies and coal are around to keep her somewhat operational that long.
There was a floating dry dock at the port probably to support the merchants and the Panther class gunboats, too small for Blucher.
(all this could be mooted by harbor conditions being to shallow as mooted above)
Yes you are right. Cumberland went into the Wouri Estuary at least close enough to bombard the city. I looked up the log books of HMS Cumberland on the Old Weather part of Naval-history.net, but sadly the May - November logs are not available. Come Dec 1, Cumberland was still anchored at Souellaba Point anchorage. Souellaba Point is the south end of the Wouri Estuary, close to the sea, but I'm not sure exactly where the anchorage was. The logs do note Cumberland's draft as 26'2" forward 25'4" aft on Dec 3rd, which suggests they were concerned about their draft. Draft was measured before and after coaling.
Yep, Challenger as well. I did consider that but found the same gap as YYJ. So I cannot confirm that this is what happened. However, from the Anchorage site (marked on the map I posted earlier and deep enough for large ships) the city could likely be reached by the ships guns. So the two are not necessarily in conflict. If I am right then Cumberland and Challenger were in the anchorage, and bombarded German positions from there, while the 8 ft draft gunboat HMS Dwarf went in closer to shore.
Blucher could park herself in the anchorage and she would form a serious challenge for a 6” armed ship like the Cumberland. And in that position the shore battery could probably have reached her. But it could not have reached the range at which a 12” gunned ship could fire on Blucher in the anchorage. Thus Blucher would not be safe in harbour.
You smart guys with all the data probably know the difference between the range of the Blucher 9.2 vs 12 inch. I imagine it depends on what vintage of 12 inch.
The Germans could have spotters on Yoss point for fall of shot to help.
I imagine if the war was delayed until 1916, the Germans might scrap an old wittlsebach battleship or something and set up some bigger guns on the point, as they might figure they couldn't win some big battle in the North Sea against the Queen Elizabeth class, and might seek alternative naval strategies.
Actually, now that you ask, Blucher has the better range. The 12"/ 40 guns on the Formidable, London, Duncan, and King Edward VII class pre-Dreadnoughts had a range of 15,150 yards, at 13.5 degrees, which was the maximum elevations for those mounts. Blucher's 21cm (8.2") /45 guns had a range of 20,900 yards at 30 degrees, which was the maximum elevation of Blucher's turrets. Lets say we are talking about HMS King Edward VII as the ship sent to bottle up Blucher and sink her if possible. . Rate of fire for the British 12"/40 was 1.5 rounds per minute, giving a RN pre-Dreadnought a broadside of 6 rounds per minute. Blucher's main battery had a rate of fire of 4-6 rounds per minute, probably lower at higher angle of elevation so lets say 4 rpm, for a broadside of 32 rounds per minute.
Blucher had 2-2.8" deck armour and a 7.1 inch belt over critical parts. King Edward VII class pre-Dreadnoughts had a 9" main belt and 2" deck of mild steel, reduced to 1" in the centre of the hull. So Blucher had a better range, similar or better armour and much higher rate of fire. However, the British 12" gun fired a 850 lb shell, whereas the German 21cm gun fired a 237 lb shell.
I can find no armour penetration stats for the 21cm shell. The British 12" /40 could penetrate 12" of Krupp Side Armour at 4800 yards with AP shells or 9.7" of Krupp Armour at 3000 yards with Common Shells. How would this perform in the real world? HMS Good Hope, HMS Invincible and HMS King Edward were similarly armoured, the pre -dreadnought having two more inches of belt armour. Scharnhorst and Gneisenau sank Good Hope with their 21cm guns without much difficulty, although they may have caused the ship to be destroyed by uncontrollable fire reaching the magazines rather than by armour penetration. S&G hit Invincible and Inflexible lots, but did no damage, and were wrecked and then sunk by the British 12" shells.
Blucher would be unlikely to be able to use her full range, because fire control of the day was not up to the task. The Battle of Coronel began at 12,000 yards and closed to 6000 yards. The Battle of the Falkland Islands began at 16,000 yards but the deadliest shooting happened at 12,000 yards.
So how would Blucher vs. King Edward VII go? Probably not quite as well as the Falklands if Blucher was stationary. At those ranges both sides could use their 6" batteries, and King Edward VII had a pair of 9.2" secondaries on each broadside to complicate things.
The odds look a lot closer than I imagined.
Germany 21 cm/45 (8.27") SK L/45 - NavWeaps
United Kingdom / Britain 12"/40 (30.5 cm) Mark IX - NavWeaps
SMS Blücher - Wikipedia
King Edward VII-class battleship - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Nice idea, but why not Tanganika / Zanzibar?
Do not know if there propper naval facilities.
Operating from Tanganika Germany could thread the trade route on the Indian Ocean and Red Sea.
Why not creating a whole IndianOcean flotilla:
SMS Blucher
SMS Roon
SMS Yorck
SMS Prinz Aldabert
SMS Freiderich Carl
completed whith some light cruisers.
Or combine the idea.
Indian Ocean Station as above.
Far East/China station:
SMS Scharnhorst
SMS Gneisenau
with light cruisers
Atlantic Station, Duala Kamerun
SMS Blucher
squadron light cruisers
Or leave the entire China station and station the SMS Scharnhorst and Gneisenau at Tanganika or Kamerun.
Although this neede some ''out of the box'' thinking or 20th century thinking a head, while most men in chanrge were 19th century guys and the diplomatic events in July changed very rapidly and unforseen
Do not know if there propper naval facilities.
Operating from Tanganika Germany could thread the trade route on the Indian Ocean and Red Sea.
Why not creating a whole IndianOcean flotilla:
SMS Blucher
SMS Roon
SMS Yorck
SMS Prinz Aldabert
SMS Freiderich Carl
completed whith some light cruisers.
Or combine the idea.
Indian Ocean Station as above.
Far East/China station:
SMS Scharnhorst
SMS Gneisenau
with light cruisers
Atlantic Station, Duala Kamerun
SMS Blucher
squadron light cruisers
Or leave the entire China station and station the SMS Scharnhorst and Gneisenau at Tanganika or Kamerun.
Although this neede some ''out of the box'' thinking or 20th century thinking a head, while most men in chanrge were 19th century guys and the diplomatic events in July changed very rapidly and unforseen
My understanding of German mobilization system for the navy is those older ACs like Roon were in reserve semi mothballed until full wartime mobilization happens, and then it takes a bit to get them ready for war. Yes those would be good candidates for raiding, as their loss wouldn't mean much but I don't think its possible to have them ready.
The tricky part about Dar Es Sallam in German East Africa is Zanzibar is right there for the British so its easy to watch the port, and OTL the British did bombard the place, so not sure how protected the harbor is, so you might have to spend on shore artillery to try to protect it. I think Tanga is pretty small and shallow for naval basing although perfectly fine for commerce.
A Blucher going out at the beginning of the war would be a surprise to the British, while a major base in the Indian Ocean established pre war might provoke the British into establishing their own squadron there in Zanzibar, and perhaps provoke the British into tighter alliance with France and Russia, as that might scare them more than the whole "risk fleet" concept.
Likely by 1916 or 1918 with no war, I do think larger colonial stationing for Germany is going to be a thing though, although that could change if the Russian navy is starting to become stout, which it would by then, and the status of British, Russian, German relations by then. Who knows maybe Russia is more scary than Germany by then to Britain????
Sort of becomes Port Authur ish, trying to sink the Blucher with long range gunfire. If the channel is narrow as discussed above, I imagine the British would block the channel, then try to finish the job in 1915 once their imperial convoys and the German squadrons are cleaned off the Oceans.Actually, now that you ask, Blucher has the better range. The 12"/ 40 guns on the Formidable, London, Duncan, and King Edward VII class pre-Dreadnoughts had a range of 15,150 yards, at 13.5 degrees, which was the maximum elevations for those mounts. Blucher's 21cm (8.2") /45 guns had a range of 20,900 yards at 30 degrees, which was the maximum elevation of Blucher's turrets. Lets say we are talking about HMS King Edward VII as the ship sent to bottle up Blucher and sink her if possible. . Rate of fire for the British 12"/40 was 1.5 rounds per minute, giving a RN pre-Dreadnought a broadside of 6 rounds per minute. Blucher's main battery had a rate of fire of 4-6 rounds per minute, probably lower at higher angle of elevation so lets say 4 rpm, for a broadside of 32 rounds per minute.
Blucher had 2-2.8" deck armour and a 7.1 inch belt over critical parts. King Edward VII class pre-Dreadnoughts had a 9" main belt and 2" deck of mild steel, reduced to 1" in the centre of the hull. So Blucher had a better range, similar or better armour and much higher rate of fire. However, the British 12" gun fired a 850 lb shell, whereas the German 21cm gun fired a 237 lb shell.
I can find no armour penetration stats for the 21cm shell. The British 12" /40 could penetrate 12" of Krupp Side Armour at 4800 yards with AP shells or 9.7" of Krupp Armour at 3000 yards with Common Shells. How would this perform in the real world? HMS Good Hope, HMS Invincible and HMS King Edward were similarly armoured, the pre -dreadnought having two more inches of belt armour. Scharnhorst and Gneisenau sank Good Hope with their 21cm guns without much difficulty, although they may have caused the ship to be destroyed by uncontrollable fire reaching the magazines rather than by armour penetration. S&G hit Invincible and Inflexible lots, but did no damage, and were wrecked and then sunk by the British 12" shells.
Blucher would be unlikely to be able to use her full range, because fire control of the day was not up to the task. The Battle of Coronel began at 12,000 yards and closed to 6000 yards. The Battle of the Falkland Islands began at 16,000 yards but the deadliest shooting happened at 12,000 yards.
So how would Blucher vs. King Edward VII go? Probably not quite as well as the Falklands if Blucher was stationary. At those ranges both sides could use their 6" batteries, and King Edward VII had a pair of 9.2" secondaries on each broadside to complicate things.
The odds look a lot closer than I imagined.
Germany 21 cm/45 (8.27") SK L/45 - NavWeaps
www.navweaps.com
United Kingdom / Britain 12"/40 (30.5 cm) Mark IX - NavWeaps
www.navweaps.com
SMS Blücher - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
King Edward VII-class battleship - Wikipedia
For total Kaiserliche Marine overseas deployment add, Mediterranean Station with one battlecruiser and one light cruiser. I had the idea that Caribbean Station was a permanent assignment as well, but I can't find any reference to it. Dresden was in the Caribbean at the outbreak of the war on a temporary assignment watching over German interests during the Mexican Revolution , and Karlsrhue had been sent to relieve her, so the timing meant that both cruisers were caught away from home, and went commerce raiding. Nurnberg and Leipzig were in a similar situation on the Pacific side of Mexico at the start of the war.
So I ask, what is Germany trying to accomplish with this naval deployment? Keeping warships overseas to engage in commerce warfare? Trying to tie down enemy ships to keep them away from other more useful jobs? (perceived enemy at the time was France and Russia, with Britain hopefully staying neutral) The ports of Duala and Dar es Salaam will need to be upgraded with at least a floating drydock each capable of servicing a large armoured cruiser. (Note that Zanzibar at the time was a separate colony independant from Tanganika and controlled by Britain. Germany had few profitable colonies. Tsingtao gave them access to the Chinese market, so would be an odd choice to give away. Tsingtao was the German Empire's most developed overseas colony IOTL. Still, if the colonies exist only for imperial prestige, the equation changes and Germany does not need a good reason to do the above plan other than "Glory to the Kaiser!"
The post does not say how many light cruisers, but I would guess a minimum of at least one per armoured cruiser, so lets say this plan calls for 5 more light cruisers to be deployed overseas. That would be in addition to the 7 light cruisers that started the war overseas IOTL= 12 light cruisers overseas. Germany started the war with 37 light cruisers, 2 of which were very obsolete (Irene class) and 12 of which were obsolescent (Geffion, Hela, and the Gazelle class). If Germany does not build more light cruisers, that means they have only 11 modern light cruisers for fleet work. Germany already had too few light cruisers for scouting and screening the fleet, so High Seas Fleet action in the North Sea would be imperilled, and have to rely on submarines and zeppelins to locate the Royal Navy. Both submarines and zeppelins sound good as scouts on paper, but performed poorly historically.
Using armoured cruisers as commerce raiders has some down sides. The ships use a lot of fuel and a lot of crew. They also overmatch merchant ships by a margin that is not needed. Light cruisers or armed merchant raiders were sufficient for the task, and performed well IOTL. They would not be useless at the task though. The Royal Navy captured a lot of German merchants with armoured cruisers at the start of the war, and In World War Two Germany went commerce raiding with panzerschiffes, heavy cruisers, and battleships.
Germany did have warships purpose built to do the job that these overseas deployments are looking to do. The Iltis class gunboats and Bussard Class unprotected cruisers could show the flag and keep the colonies in line, while not requiring too much in the way of fuel or crew. They could not fight Royal Navy cruisers though. At the start of the war some of both classes donated their weapons and crews to fit out fast liners to be used as commerce raiders.
The extra armoured cruisers sent overseas in this scenario were historically used in the Baltic fighting against Russia. If they are not available to do this, then other ships will be needed in the Baltic.
I suppose Germany could build a bunch more cruisers to fill these roles. Which takes us back to a what more can Germany build question.
Last edited:
Germany had a huge merchant fleet. I was looking for any answer of how many, and I found this, although the source for the numbers in not cited.
If Germany had 1059 merchant ships seeking shelter (not technically interned) in neutral ports, then an organized foreign clandestine network could organize coaling for German warships, for a while. There was just such an organization, called the Entappendienst that existed IOTL for this purpose. They organized colliers for Von Spee etc. from South America. If they had done more planning and been better prepared, they could have had a greater effect. Also, like Emden etc, every merchant that a commerce raider carries coal, always in its bunkers, sometimes as cargo, so if one is lucky it is possible to use captured coal. Eventually the supply of German merchants will run out as they are captured by the Royal Navy.
Interesting.
I did not know how many light cruisers the Germans had in 1914, but you expalined it very well.
The armoured cruisers are indeed not very well suited for commerce raiding. But I thought as a kind of ''fleet in beiing'' kind of thing. "" the heavy guns'' behind the light cruisers as a kind of protection.
I think just showing the flag. I wonder if there was a really well thought idea behind commerce raiding in case of conflict. The whole mind set was too much 19th century if not 18th century by the men who made the desicions.
The commerce raiding done by the German cruisers in OTL were more or less the result of ad hoc desicions dictated by the course of events. I wonder if it was the result of real strategical planning.
And don't forget the war would be over with Christmass....
In addition to what @YYJ wrote the Germans could have had larger stockpiles of steaming coal at their overseas ports. Yes, that requires years of forward planning when the POD is July, 1914. However, the thread is moving in that direction anyway. Also the Second Reich didn't have the economic problems that plagued the Third Reich in the period before its world war so paying for it shouldn't be a problem.
They'd still have to evade the British cruiser squadrons between the British Isles and the Gulf of Guinea such as the one between Natal (in Brazil) and Freetown. That doesn't mean it can't be done. We had a thread about Goeben steaming from the Adriatic to Germany via Gibraltar and the Denmark Strait in July & August 1914 (in March 2021) which I supported. Therefore, if Goeben could have done that Blücher could have done as you propose.
Last edited: