Largest naval battle?

[Bizon77]

I was arguing with somebody today about what was the largest Naval battle ever. I said that the Battle of Lade, which involved somethink like 900 ships, was the biggest. But he says that the battle of Trafalgar was the biggest. (Didn't Trafalgar involve only 50 ships?)

Does anybody know for sure what naval battle was the biggest ever?

 

[Duke of Marlbrough]

Lade seems to have been 953 ships, Trafalgar 62.

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Battle of Lade
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Battle of Trafalgar

 

[Case]

There are several possible definitions for the 'biggest' sea battle.
In terms of numbers ships involved, the title goes to one of the major galley fleet battles in the Mediterraean - due to the unreliability of sources its hard to say which one was the bigest.

However, in terms of the largest number of personnel involved, the biggest naval battle in history was the Battle of Lyete Gulf in 1944. This battle pitted the main body of the US Pacific Fleet against virtually everything the Japanese had.

 

[Bugfatty300]

Niether of those actually. The Battle of Leyte Gulf involved 300 Carriers, Battleships, Cruisers and Destroyers and over 1,000 submarines, transports, torpedo boats and support ships.

But you were right about Lade being WAY bigger than Trafalgar.

 

[Bizon77]

There are several possible definitions for the 'biggest' sea battle.
In terms of numbers ships involved, the title goes to one of the major galley fleet battles in the Mediterraean - due to the unreliability of sources its hard to say which one was the bigest.

However, in terms of the largest number of personnel involved, the biggest naval battle in history was the Battle of Lyete Gulf in 1944. This battle pitted the main body of the US Pacific Fleet against virtually everything the Japanese had.

I guess what I'm talking a combination of Ships + Personel = SP. The largest number would be the biggest.

 

[Esckey]

What about Jutland?

 

[YotoKiller]

The Battle of Leyte is generally considered to be the largest naval battle in history. Certainly in terms of area and personel and casaulties.

It was also one of the largest air engagments of the war and certainly the largest carrier battle ever. I think it involved over 1,500 carrier born fighters and bombers. And it was also the bloodiest with 10,000 - 15,000 killed.

Either way you look at it Leyte was massive.

 

[storealex]

The Battle of Jutland (known as the Battle of Skagerrak in Germany), fought between the British Grand Fleet and the German High Seas Fleet, was the largest surface naval battle of all time, the only major fleet action of World War 1, and the last major fleet action that the participants will ever fight. It also played a key role in the demise of the reputation of battlecruiser, saw the first use of a carrier based aircraft in battle and is one of the most controversial naval actions in the Royal Navy's long history.

Copied from:

http://www.worldwar1.co.uk/jutland.html

 

[YotoKiller]

I disagree. Jutland invloved 240 ships. The Battle of Lade and Leyte were both obviously bigger.Naval Battle

Jutland
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jutland

Leyte
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leyte_Gulf

Lade
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lade

 

[Bizon77]

Ive heard of Jutland But I have never heard of Leyte Gulf. How do pronounce that? Like a French word?

 

[Xen]

i would bet good money that, if judgeing by the number of ships involved, that the classical naval battles of the greco-persian, or the Punic wars could easilly outnumber any bsea battle after them.

those were, after all, the time of full-fleet engagements in all or nothing battles- Roman engagement fleets alone during the Punic wars numbered at over 500 ships per fleet, at least

 

[Bugfatty300]

Ive heard of Jutland But I have never heard of Leyte Gulf. How do pronounce that? Like a French word?

Leyte was a battle that took place in waters around the Philippine Islands in 1944. I think it involved something along the lines of 279 principle war ships. (Carriers, Battleships, Cruisers ect.) and 1,000 auxilery ships (Transports, Submarines, Torpedo boats etc.)

There were several smaller engagments in the battle but the BIG one was when 2 Japanese surface fleets shot it out with 900 U.S. transports, PT boats, Corvettes and Destroyers at the Gulf of Leyte.

I guess what I'm talking a combination of Ships + Personel = SP. The largest number would be the biggest.

Then Leyte would probably be your best bet. The 36 aircraft carriers alone probably involved over 100,000 sailors. Not including the 65 Battleships and Cruisers and the 1,000 other ships.

 

[Case]

There were several smaller engagments in the battle but the BIG one was when 2 Japanese surface fleets shot it out with 900 U.S. transports, PT boats, Corvettes and Destroyers at the Gulf of Leyte.

Nope - Only one of the three Japanese forces actually closed in on the main body of the American fleets, and it never penetrated into Lyete Gulf. This force was the First Striking Force under Admidal Kurita which shot up some escort carriers and destroyers off Samar before turning and running instead of pressing the attack. It never even came close to the transports, and if it had done so this force would have faced the half a elderly dozen US battleships which were supporting operations on Lyete and possibly the modern fast battleships with were racing north following their great victory in the Suriago Strait (see below).

The Northern force was a diversion to draw away the American fleet carriers (which worked, though the Americans sunk most of the Japanese carriers in this force - which was fine with the Japanese as they no longer had any planes for them). The Southern force was slaughtered by the Americans in the Battle of Suriago Strait.

Basically, the principle reason that Lyete Gulf was the biggest naval battle was that the US fleet was so huge, and not that the Japanese force was anywhere near as big. Given the disparity between the size and competance of the forces engaged, the Japanese were lucky to get out of the battle with any ships left floating.

www.warships1.com has the orders of battle of all the engagements which constitute the Battle of Leyte Gulf. Finding the locations of these engagements on a map is a great way to apreciate the vast area this battle was fought over.
see:
Palawan Passage, 23 October 1944
Battle of Sibuyan Sea, 24 October 1944
Battle of Surigao Strait, 24-25 October 1944
Battle off Samar, 25 October 1944
Battle of Cape Engano, 25 October 1944

 

[Vasileius]

i would bet good money that, if judgeing by the number of ships involved, that the classical naval battles of the greco-persian, or the Punic wars could easilly outnumber any bsea battle after them.

Actually ... no .
In the Salamis battle , the first great naval battle recorded , the Persians had about 800 galleys and the Greeks 370 .

In the Actium battle , the biggest Roman naval battle , Antony had 500 and Octavian 400 .

As you said the Romans had large fleets , but there was no enemy such powerful as them in the seas . Their navy was hunting pirates ...

 

[Evie]

Leyte get my vote.

Why?

Three reasons :

1)1000 ships present. That's reason enough in itself - Salamis is the only one that could potentially beat it from all those mentioned so far, and that's based on the "high estimates" numbers, which aren't always that trustworthy. Estimates ranges from 300 to 380 for Greece, and from 600 to 800 for Persia (That's SERIOUS estimates from modern historians. Herodotus and his 1200 ships not being taken in account here).

2)Even if Salamis really had more ships, trying to count solely on number of ships involved is junk, considering that about 18 battleships or so were present at Leyte, with battleship complement being around 2000 crewmembers. Add to that 17 american fleet carriers with roughly 3500 crew, and you have 80 000 + crew members present. And that's without considering ANY of the smaller ships.

3)And even if you count anything involved wether it be a simple fishing boat or afleet carrier as "1", that STILL doesn't add up to anything because then you'd have in any fairness to count the planes for Leyte on the same basis seeing as they were just as much involved in the naval battle as the ships, and more in some cases, and seeing moreover as they fought pretty much independantly (ie, it's not like they were boarding parties on a ship waiting to be thrown at the opponent). And that alone add 2000+ units to Leyte.

 

[Xen]

Actually ... no .
In the Salamis battle , the first great naval battle recorded , the Persians had about 800 galleys and the Greeks 370 .

In the Actium battle , the biggest Roman naval battle , Antony had 500 and Octavian 400 .

As you said the Romans had large fleets , but there was no enemy such powerful as them in the seas . Their navy was hunting pirates ...

someone is forgetting the carthaginian Empire- the undisputed master of the western Med. Sea until the punic wars

thouigh that said, engagments, IIRC, didnt exceed the 150-200 ship range then- buts still a great deal considering it was a feat in it slef to be able to build, man, and upkeep suck large ships as were used, relitivlly speakign after all, these were the battle ships of thier era, the Quinquiremes

 

[Vasileius]

Well , yes , in my mind was the complete Roman empire ...
Actually , after the complete Sicilian occupation by the Romans, the Carthaginians lost the battle of the sea ... Plus , there were no BIG naval battles between them , at least not that big as the others mentioned ...

 

[Esckey]

I don't think we should count the transport ships involved in Lyete Gulf cause that's like stacking the deck. By counting them you could say Canada has the largest navy in the world cause we have so many fishing boats

 

[Thorgalaeg]

The Battle of Leyte is generally considered to be the largest naval battle in history. Certainly in terms of area and personel and casaulties.

It was also one of the largest air engagments of the war and certainly the largest carrier battle ever. I think it involved over 1,500 carrier born fighters and bombers. And it was also the bloodiest with 10,000 - 15,000 killed.

Either way you look at it Leyte was massive.

Not bloddiest, for instance in Lepanto died about 20,000 men and maybe there are other bloodier naval battles.

 

[Evie]

Esckey - were the transport military vessels (yes they were) and present at Leyte (yes too)?

I mean, if you count the ships that were originally in the greek fleet at Ladre but withdrew, and so on, then there is no reason whatsoever not to count the transports, just because they remained safe from the battle - they *were* the target of the Japanesse, and the fact that the Japanesse were prevented from doing them in is patentedly irrelevant ; they were part of the battle.