SEARCH FINESCALE.COM

Enter keywords or a search phrase below:

Ship Trivia Quiz

452454 views
3119 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    February 2006
  • From: Norfolk, UK
Posted by RickF on Sunday, March 15, 2009 7:08 PM

Thanks, George. I did get it early on, but I was trying to tie in "Chateau". I was going to submit this in the "Identify This" thread, but since I don't know the name of the ship.... here it is.

It's a very poor picture - but it is from a book over 90 years old.

 

It shows an un-named Royal Navy vessel, a member of a squadron that existed for only a short period during World War One, that was the brainchild of an exceptional but controversial officer who retired as an admiral.

Who was the admiral and what was name and purpose of the squadron?

Rick

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Portsmouth, RI
Posted by searat12 on Monday, March 16, 2009 9:30 AM
This is something of a guess, but I believe this is an 'Orion' class battleship, that may have been assigned to the proposed 'Baltic Squadron' by Admiral Lord Fisher.  The intent of the squadron (which also included battlecruisers Courageous and Glorious) was to effect a landing on the shallow Baltic coast of Germany......? However, all of the Orions were in the Second Battle Squadron for all of the war, so i don't kow how official the Baltic Squadron would have been.  Of course, the other possibility is that this ship is a 'dummy' battleship intended to look like the HMS Orion, and that ship was 'Oruba' (later sunk as a blockship in Greece)  It is hard to tell from the photo because it is so small, but the ship appears just a bit stumpy to be a proper Orion, so perhaps this is the answer... The Special Service Squadron, commanded by Commodore Haddock, intended to fool the Germans with dummy battleships! 
  • Member since
    February 2006
  • From: Norfolk, UK
Posted by RickF on Monday, March 16, 2009 6:57 PM

Well done, searat - nearly there. It is, of course, one of the dummy battleships of what my book calls the Special Coastal Squadron, commanded, as you say by Commodore Haddock (what a splendid name - good job he was promoted from Captain, else Tintin might have been involved!). However, who was the admiral who was the driving force behind the squadron?

Rick

  • Member since
    March 2009
  • From: brisbane australia
Posted by surfsup on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 4:34 AM
would it have been Admiral Jellicoe?

If i was your wife, i'd poison your tea! If Iwas your husband, I would drink it! WINSTON CHURCHILL

  • Member since
    February 2006
  • From: Norfolk, UK
Posted by RickF on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:51 AM

No - the man we are looking for had been retired, but was brought back on the outbreak of war.

Rick

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Portsmouth, RI
Posted by searat12 on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 7:48 AM
That would be Admiral Sir Percy Scott.....
  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Portsmouth, RI
Posted by searat12 on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 7:51 AM

I got my initial sourcing from the New York Times at:  http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=980DE3DA163AE532A25750C1A9679C946996D6CF

 

Obviously, Admiral Scott knows the name of his command best!!!

  • Member since
    February 2006
  • From: Norfolk, UK
Posted by RickF on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 6:50 PM

That's the man, one of my personal heroes - but he must have been a so-and-so to work for! Well done. Your go.

Rick

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Portsmouth, RI
Posted by searat12 on Wednesday, March 18, 2009 9:57 AM

Right!  Here's the question.... This ship was the first in the fleet with a feature that was invariably used on capital ships of the opposing force, but early on was the sole representative with this feature in its fleet.  It was built on the basis of misinformation, and that flaw eventually contributed to its loss.  While often considered a failure for that reason, in fact it can very much be seen as a precursor to a whole class of ships built by most navies, and if it had been used in such a fashion, it most likely would have had a very good career.

What is the unusual feature, and what was the name of the ship?

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Portsmouth, RI
Posted by searat12 on Friday, March 20, 2009 7:16 AM
No guesses?  Is another hint needed?
  • Member since
    March 2009
  • From: brisbane australia
Posted by surfsup on Friday, March 20, 2009 7:25 AM
yes please

If i was your wife, i'd poison your tea! If Iwas your husband, I would drink it! WINSTON CHURCHILL

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Portsmouth, RI
Posted by searat12 on Friday, March 20, 2009 8:34 AM
Here's a hint, and a big one too!  The ship was built in the 20th century........
  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Portsmouth, RI
Posted by searat12 on Saturday, March 21, 2009 8:52 AM
Wow, it seems I have you all stumped, and that was not my intention!  So here's ANOTHER huge hint!!  The ship was German.........
  • Member since
    January 2006
Posted by EPinniger on Saturday, March 21, 2009 11:43 AM

It sounds like the armoured cruiser (near-battlecruiser) SMS Blucher to me; it was essentially a battlecruiser, but seriously undergunned (12 8.2" guns) compared to its British equivalents, as at the time it was built the Germans did not realise the British battlecruisers were being built with 12" guns, rather than the 8"-9" usual for armoured cruisers.

But I've no idea what its unique feature was!

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Portsmouth, RI
Posted by searat12 on Saturday, March 21, 2009 11:46 AM
You are halfway there!!
  • Member since
    March 2009
  • From: brisbane australia
Posted by surfsup on Monday, March 23, 2009 4:46 AM
 The Blucher was actually built with a larger number of guns than the British, but through misinformation she retained her original calibre of gun because the germans found out too late to change her original design. This is what led to her loss as she was repeatedly hit with a larger calibre of shell and her 8 inch guns could not reach the british ships as they were firing outside her range.

If i was your wife, i'd poison your tea! If Iwas your husband, I would drink it! WINSTON CHURCHILL

  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Portsmouth, RI
Posted by searat12 on Monday, March 23, 2009 10:40 AM

Still only halfway there!  What was the 'unique' feature?

By the way, SMS Blucher actually dished out a fair bit of punishment herself before going down, hitting HMS Lion several times.  She also didn't go down easy either, receiving more than 50 direct hits from 12" and 13.5" shells from the entire British battlecruiser squadron before finally capsizing and sinking (which is a pretty amazing performance for any ship, cruiser, battlecruiser, or battleship for that matter!)....

  • Member since
    February 2003
Posted by shannonman on Monday, March 23, 2009 12:01 PM
Was it because she was the first German warship to have a tripod mast?.
"Follow me who can" Captain Philip Broke. H.M.S. Shannon 1st June 1813.
  • Member since
    March 2007
  • From: Portsmouth, RI
Posted by searat12 on Monday, March 23, 2009 12:30 PM

Absolutely!!  Good job Shannonman!!  I thought this would be an easy question, as the very first thing you see as a WW1 British capital ship looms up on the horizon is a tripod mast but, i guess sometimes you never know!

SMS Blucher was indeed a 'ship built by mistake,' in that a clever misinformation campaign by the British fooled the Germans into believing HMS Invincible would be armed with 9" weapons, when of course it was actually equipped with 12" guns.  'Blucher' was first built with the then-standard German pole-mast arrangement, but was refitted in 1913 with the experimental tripod arrangement that was later installed on SMS Derflinger after Jutland, and also the BC Hindenburg and the Baden class of battleships as well.

SMS Blucher, although something of a failure as a battlecruiser, was quite an excellent model for the future family of 'heavy cruisers,' which largely replaced both the battlecruiser and armored cruiser after WW1 as a result of the various treaty conferences.  In only one feature was Blucher lacking, and that was speed, a problem that could have been repaired at a later date through either conversion to turbines, or lengthining the hull (as was done to the Japanese 'Kongos').  Further, if the Germans had operated 'Blucher' as an armored, or heavy cruiser, or 'commerce destroyer' (she had quite 'long legs' with a range of close to 7,000 km)) rather than as a battlecruiser, it is quite possible she would have had a much longer and more successful career both as a prototype, and as a cruiser as well....... 

And with that final note, the next question is yours Shannonman!

  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Spartanburg, SC
Posted by subfixer on Thursday, March 26, 2009 10:23 PM
This is a bump to get shannonman's attention.

I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

  • Member since
    February 2003
Posted by shannonman on Friday, March 27, 2009 2:50 PM

Sorry guys,

I've been a bit busy this last couple of days [ the boss has had me out on the garden ].

OK, We know that Capt. Lawrence said   " Don't give up the ship" , but , who said " Save thyself, my friend, and leave me to my fate. !!!!! "

"Follow me who can" Captain Philip Broke. H.M.S. Shannon 1st June 1813.
  • Member since
    February 2003
Posted by shannonman on Wednesday, April 1, 2009 8:18 AM

HELLO,

Is this question too hard ?

 

 

 

 

 

"Follow me who can" Captain Philip Broke. H.M.S. Shannon 1st June 1813.
  • Member since
    February 2003
Posted by shannonman on Thursday, April 2, 2009 3:33 PM

OK, heres a clue.

 

Revenge

"Follow me who can" Captain Philip Broke. H.M.S. Shannon 1st June 1813.
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Seattle, WA
Posted by Surface_Line on Thursday, April 2, 2009 5:09 PM
Grenville?
  • Member since
    February 2003
Posted by shannonman on Friday, April 3, 2009 2:16 PM

Correct answer, I thought I was the only one on this thread.     

On August 31st 1591 the Revenge with about a hundred men fought a battle against some fifty Spanish ships. Battle ceased as darkness fell, and the next day the Spaniards were surprised to see the Revenge still floating. Its mast and sails were gone, its holds were flooded. Grenville ordered his chief gunner to sink the Revenge to stop it falling into enemy hands, but the survivors wanted him to surrender. Grenville agreed provided the Spanish would grant them full honours of war, and return them to England immediately. The Spanish commander agreed and the battle ended. The Revenge was captured, and Grenville, mortally wounded, was taken on board the Spanish Admiral's ship San Pablo, where he died a few days afterwards. Shortly afterwards an enormous storm sank the Revenge and 14 Spanish ships.

The captain of the George Noble is said to have offered his help , but was told, " Save thyself, my friend and leave me to my fate."

Grenville had about 150 men on deck and 90 others below deck sick, he faced 7000 men on the Spanish ships. the Spanish lost 3 galleons sunk and 1 ran aground to stop itself sinking and around 2000 dead.

The book ,  Defiance at sea by Jon Guttman contains a good account of the action.

 

The next question is yours.

"Follow me who can" Captain Philip Broke. H.M.S. Shannon 1st June 1813.
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Seattle, WA
Posted by Surface_Line on Monday, April 6, 2009 7:50 PM

At least this will not be a US Navy-specific question.  Not too trivial, I hope.

What unique feature did USS Hull (DD-945) have in common with the Soviet/ Russian cruiser Azov?

 

  • Member since
    April 2005
Posted by ddp59 on Monday, April 6, 2009 9:14 PM
1 single 8" gun in place of forward 5" gun.
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Seattle, WA
Posted by Surface_Line on Monday, April 6, 2009 10:08 PM
That was a spacific fact about Hull, it's true, but - no, Azov never had a 8" gun or a forward 5" gun.
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: Seattle, WA
Posted by Surface_Line on Saturday, April 11, 2009 8:42 PM
ok - I guess a hint is required.  Mr DDP59 has pointed out that Hull was the trials ship for the USN 8" MCLWG.   ...?
  • Member since
    March 2009
  • From: brisbane australia
Posted by surfsup on Sunday, April 12, 2009 2:09 AM
The Azov was specifically built as a weapons test platform from the start. She tested the SS-6N missile system I think it was called. She served primarily in the Black Sea for most of her career.

If i was your wife, i'd poison your tea! If Iwas your husband, I would drink it! WINSTON CHURCHILL

JOIN OUR COMMUNITY!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

SEARCH FORUMS
FREE NEWSLETTER
By signing up you may also receive reader surveys and occasional special offers. We do not sell, rent or trade our email lists. View our Privacy Policy.