Re: History repeats itself
The major engagement that caused Sharnhorst's demise was with KGV. At the time, the British ships were doing what they had done before with Bismark, keeping tabs on where the enemy was, and trying to get the major units, in this case KGV to a position to attack.
Because the British had more functional radar, this could be done in all weather and at night. IIRC, the accounts I read, Scharnhorst had radar, but it was either non-functional or had been damaged by Norfolk.
I can't remember the exact track, but I believe that Scharnhorst was attempting to get back to where there was air cover under the cover of darkness, and was caught completely by surprise by the night action where KGV engaged in the dark with radar controlled gunfire.
The initial damage that would lead to the sinking was done by the 14" guns of KGV (which were a significant advantage compared to the 11", or strictly speaking 28cm guns of Scharnhorst), both in terms of range and destructive power, although the battle was fought at relatively close range compared to other big ship engagements.
Sufficient damage was done in the initial couple of skirmishes that it became possible for the cruisers and even destroyers to get involved as Scharnhorst's offensive capabilities dropped due to damage.
But like Bismark before it, gunfire alone proved unable to sink the German ship. She was in no way a functional ship towards the end, and given the state of the German war machine, would never fight again, but it was important to the British that Scharnhorst was sunk, so the swarm was really the cruisers and escorts closing in to try to strike with torpedoes after the main damage had been done. KGV had ceased attacking once it was likely that the smaller ships could get in to torpedo range.
I believe that there was some concern about either the amount of shells left on board KGV, or that the wear on the guns themselves was becoming significant, but KGV broke off before Scharnhorst was sunk,
Biting the hand that feeds IT
