Sink the Bismark!
Discussion
Hi guys,
Watched 'Sink the Bismarck' on the weekend, proper rainy Sunday fave and it got me thinking, was the Bismark over-rated as a battleship? It never did anything, it sunk an old fast battle ship ( I thought it Eugen that fired the killer shots?) but was made into scrap in double quick order by real 'fighting' battleships such as King George V/Rodney.
Did the Bismarck deserve the reputation it had? Do any of the German pocket battleships deserve their rep? They all seem to have failed miserably.
Watched 'Sink the Bismarck' on the weekend, proper rainy Sunday fave and it got me thinking, was the Bismark over-rated as a battleship? It never did anything, it sunk an old fast battle ship ( I thought it Eugen that fired the killer shots?) but was made into scrap in double quick order by real 'fighting' battleships such as King George V/Rodney.
Did the Bismarck deserve the reputation it had? Do any of the German pocket battleships deserve their rep? They all seem to have failed miserably.
How many did it take to take it down?
Edit
http://www.bismarck-class.dk/bismarck/bismarck_men...
Edit 2. I understand there were ships tied up just in case her sister ship broke out, that was until the RAF put paid to that idea.
Edit
http://www.bismarck-class.dk/bismarck/bismarck_men...
Edit 2. I understand there were ships tied up just in case her sister ship broke out, that was until the RAF put paid to that idea.
Edited by jmorgan on Monday 5th December 15:44
jmorgan said:
How many did it take to take it down?
Edit
http://www.bismarck-class.dk/bismarck/bismarck_men...
Edit 2. I understand there were ships tied up just in case her sister ship broke out, that was until the RAF put paid to that idea.
Lots of ships were used in the net but wasnt it KGV (in pretty much a single duel) that put her out of action?Edit
http://www.bismarck-class.dk/bismarck/bismarck_men...
Edit 2. I understand there were ships tied up just in case her sister ship broke out, that was until the RAF put paid to that idea.
Edited by jmorgan on Monday 5th December 15:44
I know what you mean but I read that site a while ago, eight fifteen inch guns. It seems it took a bit and then the end is in dispute, torpedoes from the Dorsetshire or scuttle charges. That and a chase around the Atlantic and hammered to bits at point blank range by the others, brought to bay for this by a lucky shot from a torpedo.
Another topic in my must read list if anyone has any pointers for a book.
Another topic in my must read list if anyone has any pointers for a book.
disco1 said:
Hi guys,
Watched 'Sink the Bismarck' on the weekend, proper rainy Sunday fave and it got me thinking, was the Bismark over-rated as a battleship? It never did anything, it sunk an old fast battle ship ( I thought it Eugen that fired the killer shots?) but was made into scrap in double quick order by real 'fighting' battleships such as King George V/Rodney.
Did the Bismarck deserve the reputation it had? Do any of the German pocket battleships deserve their rep? They all seem to have failed miserably.
Bismarck was fast, heavily armoured and whilst not quite the biggest guns, good rangefinding and gunnery. Main problem IMHO was that Germans didn't know how to fight with such ships; they were princpally commerce raiders and were supposed to run away if a significant threat arrived. They certainly didn't have the 'Nelson touch' - which is why most them spent the war in port - bad propaganda to lose such a major ship.Watched 'Sink the Bismarck' on the weekend, proper rainy Sunday fave and it got me thinking, was the Bismark over-rated as a battleship? It never did anything, it sunk an old fast battle ship ( I thought it Eugen that fired the killer shots?) but was made into scrap in double quick order by real 'fighting' battleships such as King George V/Rodney.
Did the Bismarck deserve the reputation it had? Do any of the German pocket battleships deserve their rep? They all seem to have failed miserably.
Bismarck was unlucky in that a single torpedo put her steering gear out of action and forced her to circle helplessly, allowing Rodney and King George V to catch up. As Bismarck could not steer it was then only a matter of time.
IMHO Bismarck as a package was the equal of any Royal Navy ship.
Looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_battle_of_the_ba... you can see there was a lot of luck involved - just like Midway.
This book is a good read: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hunting-Bismarck-C-S-Fores...
ETA First mistake was allowing Prinz Eugen was allowed to leave the crippled ship. Had she been with Bismarck during the air attack things might have been very different - no torpedo hit means both ships reach port safely.
Edited by Simpo Two on Monday 5th December 16:32
The threat that Bismark and its sister ship Tirpitz posed was serious. The concern of the allies wasn't their capability in combat against other warships, but the potential damage they could do to convoys. They were fast and powerful enough that the average convoy escort force would not have been able to stop them, and they would have sunk a huge number of merchant ships.
The sinking of the Hood provoked such a strong response largely because of how well known the Hood was. The fact that it was ageing and less capable didn't matter, it was in effect the flagship of the fleet due to its widely reported tours and foreign visits prior to the war. Apart from the actual threat, not going after the Bismark would have been a huge blow to morale at a time when things were already looking very bleak following Dunkirk. The Royal Navy was still the most powerful navy in the world at the time, and it was a slap in the face to them that they could not ignore.
The sinking of the Hood provoked such a strong response largely because of how well known the Hood was. The fact that it was ageing and less capable didn't matter, it was in effect the flagship of the fleet due to its widely reported tours and foreign visits prior to the war. Apart from the actual threat, not going after the Bismark would have been a huge blow to morale at a time when things were already looking very bleak following Dunkirk. The Royal Navy was still the most powerful navy in the world at the time, and it was a slap in the face to them that they could not ignore.
The power of the Bismark was in her ability to tie up the core capital ships of both the home and mediterranian fleets to find and sink her.
She was an immensely powerful warship, at least on a par with KGV and PoW, the two 'modern' capitals in the RN at the time.
If you are interested in this very point, I strongly recommend that you read 'PURSUIT' by Ludovic Kennedy. Kennedy is, of course, well known as an investigative journalist. Less well known is that he served in the RN during WWII and was 1st Lieutenant on the destroyer Tartar during the Bismark action. The book is one of the most gripping reads I have ever encountered and uses his 1st hand experience together with thorough secondary research to tell a fascinating narrative.
Reading this and other accounts of the actions, it has always struck me that the issue was not with KM Bismark as a ship but in the in-experience of her commanders in conducting a major sea battle. Ultimately, whatever the strengths & weaknesses of their materiel, Tovey ws a better, more experienced commander with a better support infrastructure than Lutjens.
With reference to the ship and her company, as Tovey himself said in his signal at the end of the battle:
"Bismark sunk. She put up a most gallant fight against impossible odds, worthy of the old days of theImperial German Navy"
She was an immensely powerful warship, at least on a par with KGV and PoW, the two 'modern' capitals in the RN at the time.
If you are interested in this very point, I strongly recommend that you read 'PURSUIT' by Ludovic Kennedy. Kennedy is, of course, well known as an investigative journalist. Less well known is that he served in the RN during WWII and was 1st Lieutenant on the destroyer Tartar during the Bismark action. The book is one of the most gripping reads I have ever encountered and uses his 1st hand experience together with thorough secondary research to tell a fascinating narrative.
Reading this and other accounts of the actions, it has always struck me that the issue was not with KM Bismark as a ship but in the in-experience of her commanders in conducting a major sea battle. Ultimately, whatever the strengths & weaknesses of their materiel, Tovey ws a better, more experienced commander with a better support infrastructure than Lutjens.
With reference to the ship and her company, as Tovey himself said in his signal at the end of the battle:
"Bismark sunk. She put up a most gallant fight against impossible odds, worthy of the old days of theImperial German Navy"
Edited by ClaphamGT3 on Monday 5th December 16:35
Just reading the info panel on Wiki:
Britain:
2 aircraft carriers
3 battleships
4 cruisers
7 destroyers
Germany:
1 battleship
Casualties and losses:
Britain:
1 cruiser moderately damaged
3 casualties (friendly fire)
Germany:
1 battleship sunk
2,200 dead[1]
110 captured
Of course it was to happen under today's rules, we would send £3 billion to Germany to apologise, and open an Official Enquiry into the three cases of friendly fire which would take five years, cost £20 million in legal fees and £1 million in compensation to each relative.
Britain:
2 aircraft carriers
3 battleships
4 cruisers
7 destroyers
Germany:
1 battleship
Casualties and losses:
Britain:
1 cruiser moderately damaged
3 casualties (friendly fire)
Germany:
1 battleship sunk
2,200 dead[1]
110 captured
Of course it was to happen under today's rules, we would send £3 billion to Germany to apologise, and open an Official Enquiry into the three cases of friendly fire which would take five years, cost £20 million in legal fees and £1 million in compensation to each relative.
disco1 said:
................
It never did anything, it sunk an old fast battle ship............
HMS Hood wasn't a Battleship. She was a Battlecruiser. If she had been armoured to the same degree as a proper Battleship, she might have survived more than a couple of salvos. As Davepoth said, whilst Battleships were effectively obsolete by the start of the second world war, Battlecruisers were arguably obsolete by the start of the First World War.It never did anything, it sunk an old fast battle ship............
Riff Raff said:
HMS Hood wasn't a Battleship. She was a Battlecruiser. If she had been armoured to the same degree as a proper Battleship, she might have survived more than a couple of salvos.
Yes but - the battlecruisers had to be less well armoured to attain the speed. The battlecruiser credo was to be able to sink anything it couldn't run away from, and to run away from anything it couldn't sink.Mind you is any practical level of armour is going to stop a plunging 15" shell?
Well Rodney had 16 inch guns and KG5 had 14 inch guns. Neither of those two ships sank Bismark despite pounding her into a floating wreck. The main armour was not penetrated at all. Even the torpedos didn't sink her as examination of the wreck has since showed - they were defeated by the underwater armour and didn't penetrate the inner hull. She only went down because the crew scuttled her.
Simpo Two said:
Yes but - the battlecruisers had to be less well armoured to attain the speed. The battlecruiser credo was to be able to sink anything it couldn't run away from, and to run away from anything it couldn't sink.
Mind you is any practical level of armour is going to stop a plunging 15" shell?
Though neither the Bismark or the Prinz Eugen used AP shells because they mis-identified Hood & PoW as light cruisersMind you is any practical level of armour is going to stop a plunging 15" shell?
Riff Raff said:
HMS Hood wasn't a Battleship. She was a Battlecruiser. If she had been armoured to the same degree as a proper Battleship, she might have survived more than a couple of salvos. As Davepoth said, whilst Battleships were effectively obsolete by the start of the second world war, Battlecruisers were arguably obsolete by the start of the First World War.
From my "war nerd" days of yore, I recall that Hood was a very old ship, but had been refitted extensively; they unfortunately left a gap between the side and top armour and that's where she was hit.davepoth said:
Riff Raff said:
HMS Hood wasn't a Battleship. She was a Battlecruiser. If she had been armoured to the same degree as a proper Battleship, she might have survived more than a couple of salvos. As Davepoth said, whilst Battleships were effectively obsolete by the start of the second world war, Battlecruisers were arguably obsolete by the start of the First World War.
From my "war nerd" days of yore, I recall that Hood was a very old ship, but had been refitted extensively; they unfortunately left a gap between the side and top armour and that's where she was hit.The power of the Bismark was in her ability to tie up the core capital ships of both the home and mediterranian fleets to find and sink her.
This. The beauty of ships like the Bismark and the Tirpitz is (or was) what they were capable of and the fear they struck into the opposition as a result, using resources that could be used elsewhere in the war effort...
This. The beauty of ships like the Bismark and the Tirpitz is (or was) what they were capable of and the fear they struck into the opposition as a result, using resources that could be used elsewhere in the war effort...
Simpo Two said:
Just reading the info panel on Wiki:
Britain:
2 aircraft carriers
3 battleships
4 cruisers
7 destroyers
Germany:
1 battleship
Casualties and losses:
Britain:
1 cruiser moderately damaged
3 casualties (friendly fire)
Germany:
1 battleship sunk
2,200 dead[1]
110 captured
Of course it was to happen under today's rules, we would send £3 billion to Germany to apologise, and open an Official Enquiry into the three cases of friendly fire which would take five years, cost £20 million in legal fees and £1 million in compensation to each relative.
Considering the number of German sailors they left to their deaths in the Atlantic you might be right there.Britain:
2 aircraft carriers
3 battleships
4 cruisers
7 destroyers
Germany:
1 battleship
Casualties and losses:
Britain:
1 cruiser moderately damaged
3 casualties (friendly fire)
Germany:
1 battleship sunk
2,200 dead[1]
110 captured
Of course it was to happen under today's rules, we would send £3 billion to Germany to apologise, and open an Official Enquiry into the three cases of friendly fire which would take five years, cost £20 million in legal fees and £1 million in compensation to each relative.
Mojocvh said:
Considering the number of German sailors they left to their deaths in the Atlantic you might be right there.
With a U-boat alert in the region, a Captain's duty is to protect his ship and crew and British sailors were worth more than German ones.If you allow for the accounts of U-boats machine-gunning British survivors, it probably cancels out.
Had the Bismarck chosen to surrender instead of fight uselessly to the death, many more lives would have been saved.
Jimbo. said:
The power of the Bismark was in her ability to tie up the core capital ships of both the home and mediterranian fleets to find and sink her.
This. The beauty of ships like the Bismark and the Tirpitz is (or was) what they were capable of and the fear they struck into the opposition as a result, using resources that could be used elsewhere in the war effort...
Would the resources argument apply to Germany as well - what if the Kriegsmarine had put the materials and manpower involved in building and running the Bismarck and the few other capital ships they had into more U-boats?This. The beauty of ships like the Bismark and the Tirpitz is (or was) what they were capable of and the fear they struck into the opposition as a result, using resources that could be used elsewhere in the war effort...
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff