Biggest sea battle in modern times?
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: General History
Forum Name: All Battles Project
Forum Discription: Forum for the All Battles military history project
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24538
Printed Date: 14-May-2024 at 02:20
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Biggest sea battle in modern times?
Posted By: Jams
Subject: Biggest sea battle in modern times?
Date Posted: 31-May-2008 at 09:53
|
Hello
I was thinking about what the biggest sea battle was in the modern age from 1900 onwards.
Usually it is claimed that the battle of Leyte Gulf is the biggest, but is it really?
The way I see it:
The battle was at least three completely separate battles (You could even say five, but some of the forces was repeated, so I count only three), although they were the result of one strategic plan by the Japanese.
Many of the vessels did not participate in the sea battle, as they were part of the landing forces, and should be exluded.
The total forces of all battles included was of course the biggest by far if thought of as one sea battle.
However - here's what I think is the biggest sea battles:
1: The Battle of the Philippine Sea - Imho the largest carrier battle in WWII, as it was one large battle with most of the vessels being part of the battlegroups.
40 capital ships, if light carriers also count as capital ships.
186 ships total.
2: The battle of Jutland:
The biggest pure ship to ship battle by far, the biggest battleship battle, the bigest number of capital ships in a single battle - in my opinion the largest real seabattle.
58 capital ships, excluding the 6 German pre-dreadnoughts.
250 ships in all.
Agree/disagree?
|
Replies:
Posted By: Vorian
Date Posted: 31-May-2008 at 12:48
| Battles involving carriers shouldn't be considered pure naval battles since the aircrafts played the most important role. |
Posted By: deadkenny
Date Posted: 31-May-2008 at 13:42
|
You have a couple problems with comparing different situations. One is precisely defining a 'battle'. As you've noted yourself, what is 'loosely' termed a 'battle' might actually be a serious of battles. If anything simply 'called' a 'Battle of ....' is a candidate, then how about the 'Battle of the Atlantic' in WWII. I'm not seriously proposing that, but just using it as an example to illustrate my point. The other problem is, as mentioned above, the advent of the aircraft carrier as the 'new capital ship'. If you consider carrier strikes as part of a naval battle, then you have to consider Pearl Harbor, with the entire American fleet at anchor on one side and the entire Japanese task force on the other. If you more narrowly define a 'battle', to exclude separate 'actions' strung together (your example of Leyte Gulf) and specify 'surface actions', then you are clearly left with Jutland. ------------- "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 31-May-2008 at 15:03
|
Jutland was also many nseperate actions. The initial Battlecruiser action, (with the QE class BB's in support) the action between the retraeting British and the German High seas fleet, the main fleet action and the night action which involved mainly destroyers, (though capital ships kept firing).
A battle is by defination a series of actions, often seperate. What makes it a battle is if they are all aimed at achieving one objective. Leyet Gulf, Jutland etc were definatly battles. ------------- |
Posted By: deadkenny
Date Posted: 31-May-2008 at 15:21
"The Battle of Leyte Gulf included four major naval battles: the Battle of the Sibuyan Sea, the Battle of Surigao Strait, the Battle of Cape Engaño and the Battle off Samar, as well as other actions."
Admittedly from Wiki, however, it just serves to make the point that the (so called) Battle of Leyte Gulf is frequently recognized to have consisted of several distinct 'battles' spanning four days. I am not aware of any such view of Jutland - which although it was a 'series' of 'engagements', ran from the afternoon of May 31 through to the early morning hours of June 1 (about 12 hours) and is generally viewed as a single 'battle'. ------------- "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana |
Posted By: Jams
Date Posted: 31-May-2008 at 16:34
Yes, but all ships still took part at the same time. Granted, the destroyers may only have actually used the torpedoes at the end of the battle, after the main gun action, but they were still part of the fleets throughout. After the run to the north, all ships were present in roughly the same area of battle. (Except the ones that exploded, of course)
If we should go by that criteria, then the battle of the Leyte Gulf wasn't that big despite the huge forces, as many of them didn't actually shoot at anything, such as much of Halsey's fleet. ------------- |
Posted By: Maximus
Date Posted: 05-Jun-2008 at 01:13
|
I'll cast a vote for Jutland. But by a narrow margin. The Battle of Jutland caused the German Navy to change tactics. The Germans abandoned warfare with capitol ships, and resorted to submarine warfare thereafter.
------------- 
|
Posted By: pikeshot1600
Date Posted: 05-Jun-2008 at 01:16
So they replaced one failed strategy with another that failed (twice).
|
Posted By: Maximus
Date Posted: 05-Jun-2008 at 01:18
|
Yeah. It sure didn't work out too well for them did it? -------------
|
Posted By: mazuk
Date Posted: 26-Oct-2008 at 10:22
Am i the only person that can't imagine a Sea battle of that size? ------------- "Night or the Prussians" |
Posted By: warwolf1969
Date Posted: 29-Jun-2010 at 10:33
|
On sheer numbers Jutland wins. From the books I've read it was a amazing sight when both Fleets began to pound each other. |
Posted By: William Davis
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2011 at 04:02
Disagree. If the aircraft are flown from naval vessels, flown by naval fliers, maintained by naval personnel, in the naval chain of command, and if said battles are for supremacy of the seas, then they are naval battles. ------------- All that Glitters is not gold.... |
Posted By: William Davis
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2011 at 04:14
So if time is your defining factor, then Stalingrad was 180 battles. ------------- All that Glitters is not gold.... |
Posted By: tjadams
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2011 at 10:19
I can see where he was coming from in the sense that a naval battle is between two opposing ships, but those days have been gone for 200 years. An aircraft carrier is a boat does float it is in the Navy it is, as you say, staffed by sailors, and it is functioning within its design, and it is dueling with another ship from another nation. I too would consider an aircraft carrier, or any battle containing an aircraft carrier as qualifying as a naval battle. |
Posted By: Vladd
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2011 at 10:44
| Naval aircraft are just another long range weapon in a naval fleets arsenal, no different than missiles or torpedoes. |
Posted By: tjadams
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2011 at 11:03
|
Dang, after reading my reply, its sounds like I was a monkey with one arm typing. I was using voice recognition software and it seems it might be better used for typing in documents and not chat boards. |
Posted By: Vladd
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2011 at 11:17
Time to slay the Dragon? |
Posted By: tjadams
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2011 at 13:13
|
Not to derail this thread further, but the software works GREAT and I'd recommend it for papers or dictation. I've only had it a few days and with time I hope to master it. I have way too many papers to write to slay the Dragon just yet.
 |
Posted By: Nick1986
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2011 at 21:06
Strangely enough, both sides claimed victory. Not that it mattered to the enlisted sailors who drowned ------------- Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains! |
Posted By: PanzerOberst
Date Posted: 02-Feb-2012 at 02:00
|
I am inclined to choose Jutland, but have to agree Leyte is also a strong candidate (even though it spanned four days). In intensity, IMHO would be the former (it brings to mind the battle of Tsushima, which was fought in narrower waters). ------------- "If the tanks succeed, then victory follows" - Heinz W. Guderian |