One peculiarity of the Imperial German Navy was that they always referred to battleships as ‘ships of the line’ and to battlecruisers as ‘large cruisers’. The reason for this was the German Naval Law. It stated that 3 ‘ships of the line’ and one ‘large cruiser’ were to be build each year. Parts of Parliament wanted a common type of fast battleship with the ulterior motive of omitting the cruiser so that only 3 capital ships would be built each year. This would of course reduce the costs of shipbuilding.
On the other hand, Admiral Tirpitz needed numbers. So the decision was made that ‘large cruisers’ would be faster than ‘ships of the line’ and that their armament was to be of lesser caliber than contemporary German battleships - at least of lesser caliber than British battlecruisers. Furthermore, for the parliamentarians, ‘large cruisers’ had to have different ‘look’ than ‘ships of the line’. This was used as proof that these ‘large cruisers’ were not able to fight in a pitched sea battle.
Blücher
This was to be the last armored cruiser of the Imperial German Navy. In Germany, nobody expected a cruiser design with 12'’ guns, therefore the expected enemies were cruisers like the Russian Rurik or the British Minotaur class. For this purpose, a design with 21cm guns was thought to be sufficient. Alternatively, the construction department proposed a design with 24cm guns. But this was 9% more expensive than the 21cm 12-gun design. Furthermore, the 24cm/45 gun would have been a new, untested design and the development costs would have stressed the artillery budget in an unacceptable manner.
Project E 19 (Blücher) CR
Displacement: 15800n
In class: (1)
Size Class: A
In Service: (1909)
Propulsion: Coal Recip
Crew: 970
Weapons: Armor Rtng: 15/5
F/A(2)2 24cm SKL/45 C
PB&P/P&PQ/SB&S/S&SQ(1)4 24cm SKL/45 C
Casemate(1)8 15cm SKL/45 C
Bow/P/S/Stern(1)4 45cm subm TT w/11 C/07 torp total E
Light Btry: (1)16 8.8cm SKL/45 (18.2)
Remarks: Crew estimated.
Damage and Speed Breakdown
Dam. Pts: 0 81 161 242 290 322
Surf. Speed: 24 18 12 6 0 Sinks
Von der Tann
This design was the worst nightmare of Admiral Tirpitz. A fast battleship, able to hold a place in the line, a straight copy of Dreadnought’s layout. Technical arguments against it were that in a 4-turret design “en-echelon,” a broadside had 8 guns, one gun more than in the 5-turret design. Furthermore, 4 double turrets were cheaper than 5 turrets with divergent number of barrels per turret.
Also, armor and displacement pushed the cost up beyond the limits of the planned budget. But in reality, the fear of budget cuts due to a feasible fast battleship design dominated all discussions about the German ‘large cruisers’.
Project F5/5a (Von der Tann) BC
Displacement: 19600n
In class: (1)
Size Class: A
In Service: (1910)
Propulsion: Coal Turbine
Crew: 1000
Weapons: Armor Rtng: 20/5/60
F/P&S/A(2)3 28cm SKL/45 C
PB&P/SB&S(1)2 28cm SKL/45 C
Casemate(1)8 15cm SKL/45 C
Bow/P/S/Stern(1)4 45cm subm TT w/11 C/07 torp total E
Light Btry: (1)16 8.8cm SKL/45 (18.2)
Remarks: Crew estimated.
Damage and Speed Breakdown
Dam. Pts: 0 94 188 282 338 376
Surf. Speed: 24 18 12 6 0 Sinks
Seydlitz
This design looked too much like a small battleship. The caliber of the guns was the same as for contemporary German ‘ships of the line’. Furthermore, at that time it was not yet proved that British battlecruisers would be armed with 13.5'’ caliber guns - so there was no reason to start a discussion in parliament whether Seydlitz was a fast battle-ship or a large cruiser.
Another argument against this type was that 5 turrets of 28cm caliber had a faster rate of fire and a higher hit probability than a 4 turret-design. As the German Navy expected engagements at a range under 10000 m, this was the strongest technical argument.
Project J IIIc (Seydlitz) BC
Displacement: 24100n
In class: (1)
Size Class: A
In Service: (1913)
Propulsion: Coal Turbine
Crew: 1000
Weapons: Armor Rtng: 22/6/60
F/2P&S/A(2)4 30.5cm SKL/50 C
Casemate(1)12 15cm SKL/45 C
Bow/P/S/Stern(1)4 50cm subm TT w/11 G7 torp total E
Light Btry: (1)12 8.8cm SKL/45 (13.7)
Remarks: Crew estimated.
Damage and Speed Breakdown
Dam. Pts: 0 110 220 330 396 440
Surf. Speed: 26 20 13 7 0 Sinks
Bibliography
Grießmer, Axel Große Kreuzer der Kaiserlichen Marine, Bernard&Graefe, 1996
Linienschiffe der Kaiserlichen Marine, Bernard&Graefe, 1999
Koop, Gerhard/ Schmolke, Klaus-Peter Die Großen Kreuzer Kaiserin Augusta bis Blücher, Bernard&Graefe, 2002
Die Großen Kreuzer Von der Tann bis Hindenburg, Bernard&Graefe, 1998
Von der Nassau zur König Klasse, Bernard&Graefe, 1999
Schmalenbach, Paul, Die Geschichte der deutschen Schiffsartillerie, Koehler, 1993
Breyer, Siegfried, Die ersten Großkampfschiffe der Kaiserlichen Marine, Podzun-Pallas, 1985
BT
Back to The Naval Sitrep # 24 Table of Contents
Back to Naval Sitrep List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 2003 by Larry Bond and Clash of Arms.
This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history and related articles are available at http://www.magweb.com