Battle of Jutland and its effects

"They have assualted their jailer but are still in gaol." That was one observers opinion of that battle. The kasier had a different, view, he said that the "myth of trafalger was shattered".

 

So who was right? I would say both, the blockade continued, but the RN had been pounded, three of its capital ships had been destroyed (Indefatiguable, Invincible and Queen Mary) and two had been damaged to an extent that they could no longer take part in the battle (Lion and Warspite), while German capital ships (except for Lutzow which weas scuttled when she could not negotiate a sand bar) were able to fight on despite horrible damage.

'Tactically' perhaps the Germans scored more 'points'.  However, they failed to follow up and exploit any theoretical advantage they may have gained by it, they didn't attempt another major 'sortie' against the British until it was 'too late' and in the meantime the Allies gained the advantage of 'control' of the seas, except for what disruption the U-boats and raiders could manage.  In other words, the German High Seas Fleet failed to achieve any 'offensive' objective (arguably its existence deterred the Allies from landings in the Baltic).  It is difficult to convincingly argue that Jutland was decisive in itself in either direction, since the Germans were no less able to contest British 'control' after the battle than they were before the battle - they simply decided not to do so again until late in the war.

Edited by deadkenny - 15-Oct-2007 at 21:40

Two points, many of the naval 'experts' of the era had been believers in Mahan's 'fleet in being' concepts.  This meant that both sides were reluctant to 'risk everything' in a decisive naval clash.  Of course the status quo favoured the British, so it was the Germans that needed to take the bigger risks (being as they were also outnumbered).  As mentioned in my previous post, there was some concern also that the loss of the German navy would leave the Baltic coast open to possible landings, which would then tie down German troops to defend against (remember, airpower was a negligible factor at that time).

The other point is that the Germans did in fact decide to 'go for broke' with their fleet at the end of the war.  However, by that time the odds were stacked even heavier against the Germans, with the US on the Allies side.  It was viewed (justifiably to some extent) by the German crews as being practically a 'suicide mission'.  There was rebellion in the ranks and bottom line is that fleet didn't sail for their 'last hurrah' mission.  So, they went out with a 'whimper' rather than a 'bang', being scuttled as part of the agreement to end the war.


Edited by deadkenny - 15-Oct-2007 at 23:27

Jellico, overall commander of Britain's naval forces, said in the early stages of the war, "I could lose this war in a single afternoon". The man had a point. The British navy had the key task of blockading Germany so that attrition could eventually wreack its havoc on the German ability to produce enough for the war effort. If Jellico followed too aggressive a policy and lost too many ships, the ability of the British navy to perform this task would be compromised. This then would translate into superior performance by the German army where it mattered: on the frontlines.

Edited by Constantine XI - 16-Oct-2007 at 11:07

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe the British strategical objective was to keep the blockade; the German to break it. That is the thing that matters.

Edited by Styrbiorn - 16-Oct-2007 at 13:25

The battle of Jutland was a trap within a trap within a trap. 

Jutland was the last chance to break the blockade and control the seas. Already they were defeated in Falklands. Germans won the dual but lost the battle. If Beatty was in command something interesting might have happened but Jellicoe was there instead.

Originally posted by Al Jassas Jutland was the last chance to break the blockade and control the seas. Already they were defeated in Falklands. Germans won the dual but lost the battle. If Beatty was in command something interesting might have happened but Jellicoe was there instead.

Originally posted by HaloChanter Both sides failed to do what it intended to do.   - But no, it didn't. As stated in the Admirality report at the beginning of the war, the Royal Navy's aim was to contain the German Fleet and maintain the blockade. It achieved both.

Edited by IDonT - 16-Oct-2007 at 22:37