Should the Graf Spee have gone down swinging?

[Troy Tempest]

Even if there really was a far more powerful RN force awaiting the Graf Spee, like the captain thought, surely it would have been better to sail out and go down fighting, rather than being scuttled, and burning for three days in front of the whole world? Shouldn't the captain have called for a volunteer crew and gone out? If he had done so, he would have discovered that there was only the same cruisers that he had battled before - no battleships or carriers. He could have made ammends for his foolishness in closing to the RN cruisers, allowing them to shell and damage him. With his superior 11" guns, he could have blown those cruisers to bits, and stayed out of their range. A complete waste of a great ship, and so early on in the war. All he did was to give the RN and England a great victory and morale boost. It's just as well he shot himself, at least he got that right.

Troy

[Tiornu]

There is no definitive answer to the question, but it's important to remember the facts. Given GS's lack of ammo, damaged FC systems, and disabled forward turret, it's very possible she would have been sunk without causing any additional damage to the British.
Nevertheless, I believe the Germans should have accepted battle. As you noted, the outcome was a big morale boost for the british. That makes it sound almost trivial, but it was by no means trivial. Simultaneous with the boost for the British, the KM suffered a blot that would remain right up to Hitler's order to scrap the surface fleet. The German command structure never transcended Langsdorff's decision.
In the unforgiving, inhuman arena of warfare, a more heroic defiance would have been worth the hundreds of lives lost.
And who knows, maybe GS would escape. All right, not likely....

[phylo_roadking]

ah, but why not....:-)) a long stern chase......how close was the NEAREST neutral port after Montevideo? I know she couldn't have manouvered very close to shore because of the mud around Montevideo Roads, but if she could have sailed sooner? How fast were her repairs in Montevideo actually carried out....slowly, perhaps thinking that she might just have been safely interned, or that the greatly-exaggerated RN force was gathering?

[Andy H]

If he had done so, he would have discovered that there was only the same cruisers that he had battled before

Well the heavy cruiser Exeter had left, given the damage received in the intial engagement. She was replaced (on the 14th?) by another heavy crusier, the Cumberland. Though she carried 8x8" compared to the 6x8" on the Exeter and some 5,000t heavier. The Cumberland was fresh and free from any damage

Regards

[Troy Tempest]

And lastly you seem to have a warped view of naval morality. Langsdorff's options were:
* to fight it out, which looked like suicide
* to try and scarper, which would have been cowardice and probably would have been suicide
* to deny the British the satisfaction of sinking the ship by scuttling it.
So it's not hard to see that he took the best way out, and repeated by Lutjens two years later. The allies would have had much greater satisfaction had the ship went down in a hail of fire with all those young men on board.

Hi truekiwijoker, but I don't see my view of naval morality is warped!
*To fight it out may have LOOKED like suicide, but it may not have ended up being that. If he had gone out, who knows how the outcome would have been. He very well may have defeated the cruisers, who knows? After that action, if it was possible, then he could have scuttled the Graf Spee at sea, instead of in full view of cameras where the pictures were sent round the world. Morale plays a big role during war, and those pictures of the GS burning for days can hardly have been good for morale.
*I agree to try and run would probably not be a good move
*To deny the RN the satisfaction of sinking her, by scuttling the GS. Well, fair enough, but why did he have to scuttle it in port? You could have had a very minimal crew to sail it out of sight at least, and scuttle it at sea, or at least away from the prying cameras. Captain Langsdorff certainly knew there was a big media presence.

Even with the damage he had incurred and with supplies running low, I still believe if he'd asked for a scratch crew to go out he would certainly have gotten one. All those crewmen volunteered for duty on a 'battle ship', I'm sure they would have understood the possible risks, but that was what they were there for, to fight the RN. It's not like they needed the entire crew to do that, large numbers of crewmen could have stayed behind so as to avoid a complete loss of crew. Even if they did have to fire with dead reckoning, the crew could have done that, couldn't they? And if it did look like they were going to be defeated, he could still have ordered what crew were left to abandon ship. I can't see that a huge amount of crewmen would have been killed before it became apparent how his chances were looking. With the crew offloaded, the ship could still have been scuttled, thus denying the RN the satisfaction of sinking it, and the Kreigsmarines honour would have been served.

As it would have turned out, he could most certainly have inflicted more damage on the RN ships, even if he was going to be beaten, and he may have forced the RN to break off themselves - who knows? I still think he should have taken the chance. What is the point of having a capital ship if you're not going to be prepared to use it? When I posted another similar thread about should the Bismarck have persued and sunk the PoW when she had the chance, someone else said Nelson certainly would have taken the chance when it was offered. I don't think you should have reckless skippers, but you should have ones who are prepared to take the chance if it looks like you have any sort of chance to take! The Scharnhorst didn't just throw in the towel at the first sign of trouble, even though it was clear he was up against a superior force. They didn't scuttle her five minutes after the first shells started to fly.

Lastly, by your name I presume you're a kiwi? Can you imagine if it was a kiwi or aussie ship in the same position, and they were facing a possible superior Japanese force, that we would have done the same thing as Captain Langsdorff? I don't think so mate/bro! No way! Thanks for your reply!

[Tiornu]

The misfortune of scuttling Graf Spee in shallow water had little to do with cameras. It had more to do with the opportunity it gave the British to sneak a peek at German radar. I'm sure Langsdorff was simply trying to find the first accommodating spot.
Now, this is an interesting thought. What if Lutjens HAD followed Langsdorff's example and scuttled his ship when its loss became inevitable?
The British were denied no great satisfaction by Langsdorff's order. They were, however, given a good laugh.
None of GS's crew volunteered for duty aboard a battleship.
I don't regard GS as being especially poor in protection. What is the basis for this criticism?
I must admit, when I first saw "truekiwijoker," I thought, "Ooh, that's one scary Scandinavian name." Thus spake senility.

[Tiornu]

No, Lutjens did not scuttle until several hours after Bismarck's loss became inevitable, after the ship had been crushed by gunfire and was sinking--the conventional time for a scuttle order.
I don't see anything particularly skimpy in GS's armor. The belt, which is 100mm thick abreast the magazines, has its shell resistance enhanced by being inclined 12deg. This would defeat small shells and CL-caliber shells except dedicated AP types. A successful penetration of the belt was insufficient in itself, as the shell would need to retain enough velocity to reach the backing bulkhead, 40mm and also inclined. Note also that, unlike many Allied designs, the German belt protected a large portion of the ship's buoyancy. The 45mm deck is sufficient against most cruiser shells out to 20,000 yards. The turret faceplates were five and a half times as thick as Cumberland's; the barbettes, four times. How many British cruisers had 6in conning tower armor? How many had 6in armor anywhere?
"I'm not sure how to respond to that."
Don't sweat it. It just means the gestalt part of my brain has retired.

[Tiornu]

By the way, who actually gave the scuttle order aboard Bismarck?

[sid guttridge]

Hi Guys,

How much easier it is to consider sending men to an academic death than to a real one!

We bear absolutely no responsibility for any lives here. Langsdorf did. Whether right or wrong in terms of national prestige, his action was both rational and humane. If only his government had had similar sensibilities about the wanton destruction of life!

Cheers,

Sid.

[Andy H]

Hi Guys,

How much easier it is to consider sending men to an academic death than to a real one!

We bear absolutely no responsibility for any lives here. Langsdorf did. Whether right or wrong in terms of national prestige, his action was both rational and humane. If only his government had had similar sensibilities about the wanton destruction of life!

Cheers,

Sid.

Isn't it strange that some view the surrender of a ship or its scuttling, differently from soldiers surrendering and not fighting to the last bullet etc.

Regards

[Tiornu]

The answer to my own question: the Bismarck scuttle order came from the XO, Commander Hans Oels.

[greenhorn]

I think the kudos accrued by the RN, if the cruisers had sunk Graf Spee, whilst she steamed to Uruguay, would have been very bad PR.

When you know your cause is lost, scuttling is just another way to stick two fingers up at the enemy.... a la Scapa Flow in June 1919, when Admiral Ludwig von Reuter order the 50 for so ships to be scuttled.....