Paper Ship: Bismarck, HMV, 1:250
Discussion
irocfan said:
dr_gn said:
I think he menat they marked the ship itself as a target, not that the actual circles were individual targets!
in fairness (apparently) the US dive-bombers used the Japanese roundels on the Akagi etc as targetsGermans used dive bombers, did we? I wonder if that was part of the thinking to deal with the RN during an invasion.
(Edit. Doh. Of course they would have planned to use dive bombers, on criticism I read off the BOB was wasting them in that battle when they could be used for invasion).
(Edit. Doh. Of course they would have planned to use dive bombers, on criticism I read off the BOB was wasting them in that battle when they could be used for invasion).
Edited by Zirconia on Monday 25th November 11:51
Zirconia said:
Germans used dive bombers, did we? I wonder if that was part of the thinking to deal with the RN during an invasion.
The Ark Royal carried Blackburn Skua dive bombers, but not sure if that was at the time the Bismarck was sunk. The AAA on the Bismark would probably have made short work of them, as opposed to the Swordfish, which - I think - flew low enough to make targetting them difficult becasue of declination limits of the Bismarck's guns.dr_gn said:
Halmyre said:
I'm slightly baffled as to why the German Navy would paint what are effectively two huge target markers on their shiny new warship. 
Two ways of looking at it I suppose: during the final battle to sink the Bismarck, Swordfish aircraft from Ark Royal initially attacked HMS Sheffield by mistake (luckily all the torpedoes failed to detonate). So maybe giant RAF roundels on the decks would have prevented that? Then again if the Swordfish crew knew the Bismarck had swastikas on the deck, why did they attack Sheffield? Answer must be that they wouldn't have been in a position to clearly see the decks during their attack runs.Halmyre said:
dr_gn said:
Halmyre said:
I'm slightly baffled as to why the German Navy would paint what are effectively two huge target markers on their shiny new warship.
Two ways of looking at it I suppose: during the final battle to sink the Bismarck, Swordfish aircraft from Ark Royal initially attacked HMS Sheffield by mistake (luckily all the torpedoes failed to detonate). So maybe giant RAF roundels on the decks would have prevented that? Then again if the Swordfish crew knew the Bismarck had swastikas on the deck, why did they attack Sheffield? Answer must be that they wouldn't have been in a position to clearly see the decks during their attack runs.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_of_...
dr_gn said:
Halmyre said:
dr_gn said:
Halmyre said:
I'm slightly baffled as to why the German Navy would paint what are effectively two huge target markers on their shiny new warship.
Two ways of looking at it I suppose: during the final battle to sink the Bismarck, Swordfish aircraft from Ark Royal initially attacked HMS Sheffield by mistake (luckily all the torpedoes failed to detonate). So maybe giant RAF roundels on the decks would have prevented that? Then again if the Swordfish crew knew the Bismarck had swastikas on the deck, why did they attack Sheffield? Answer must be that they wouldn't have been in a position to clearly see the decks during their attack runs.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_of_...
Control of the Fleet Air Arm itself had only been transferred back over to the Admiralty a few months before WW2 broke out, previously it had been administered as a branch of the RAF. David Beatty as first sea lord had campaigned hard during the interwar years for control to be handed back over to the Admiralty without success. Consequently, few people were really aware as to the true potential of the aircraft carrier in the Royal Navy, or indeed the best way to use them. Many senior RN figures still saw the main use of the aircraft carrier as spotting for the fleet. Carrier-borne fighter aircraft were even considered very much secondary to the ship-based AA guns for defense. This led to episodes early in the war that would be considered suicidal within a very short space of time- i.e. carriers travelling through enemy controlled airspace with aircraft stowed beneath decks in their armoured hangers- they believed the AA guns were more than sufficient.
The success at Taranto, along with the loss of the Prince of Wales and Repulse really brought home the importance of carrier-based aviation to the Royal Navy (by the end of the war they had some 59 carriers and several thousand aircraft), but in 1939-41 they were along way behind the capabilities of the Japanese for example, and the idea of a Japanese-style carrier launched air attack on the Bismark using a large number of combined dive-bomber / torpedo aircraft was way beyond the capability of the Fleet Air Arm.
Even by 1942, the futility of the airborne operations against Operation Cerberus (the Channel Dash) showed how primitive the capability of the Fleet Air Arm still was even at that point in the war- a suicidal attack by six Swordfish biplanes.
This is partly what makes the successful torpedo strike from Ark Royal against Bismark so impressive for me- a mere handful of aircrew, flying already antiquated aircraft in absolutely appalling weather conditions, managing to get the all important hit that eventually led to the Bismark's demise. The previously mentioned mistaken attack on Sheffield also proving somewhat fortuitous as it highlighted the shortcomings of the magnetic-fused torpedoes, which were swapped out for old contact-based ones for the subsequent successful strike.
Obviously the remarkable success of this strike was also partly only possible due to the German's being even further behind in their appreciation of the importance of naval air power.
Digress aside, another fantastic model in progress!
Squirrelofwoe said:
dr_gn said:
Halmyre said:
dr_gn said:
Halmyre said:
I'm slightly baffled as to why the German Navy would paint what are effectively two huge target markers on their shiny new warship.
Two ways of looking at it I suppose: during the final battle to sink the Bismarck, Swordfish aircraft from Ark Royal initially attacked HMS Sheffield by mistake (luckily all the torpedoes failed to detonate). So maybe giant RAF roundels on the decks would have prevented that? Then again if the Swordfish crew knew the Bismarck had swastikas on the deck, why did they attack Sheffield? Answer must be that they wouldn't have been in a position to clearly see the decks during their attack runs.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_of_...
Control of the Fleet Air Arm itself had only been transferred back over to the Admiralty a few months before WW2 broke out, previously it had been administered as a branch of the RAF. David Beatty as first sea lord had campaigned hard during the interwar years for control to be handed back over to the Admiralty without success. Consequently, few people were really aware as to the true potential of the aircraft carrier in the Royal Navy, or indeed the best way to use them. Many senior RN figures still saw the main use of the aircraft carrier as spotting for the fleet. Carrier-borne fighter aircraft were even considered very much secondary to the ship-based AA guns for defense. This led to episodes early in the war that would be considered suicidal within a very short space of time- i.e. carriers travelling through enemy controlled airspace with aircraft stowed beneath decks in their armoured hangers- they believed the AA guns were more than sufficient.
The success at Taranto, along with the loss of the Prince of Wales and Repulse really brought home the importance of carrier-based aviation to the Royal Navy (by the end of the war they had some 59 carriers and several thousand aircraft), but in 1939-41 they were along way behind the capabilities of the Japanese for example, and the idea of a Japanese-style carrier launched air attack on the Bismark using a large number of combined dive-bomber / torpedo aircraft was way beyond the capability of the Fleet Air Arm.
Even by 1942, the futility of the airborne operations against Operation Cerberus (the Channel Dash) showed how primitive the capability of the Fleet Air Arm still was even at that point in the war- a suicidal attack by six Swordfish biplanes.
This is partly what makes the successful torpedo strike from Ark Royal against Bismark so impressive for me- a mere handful of aircrew, flying already antiquated aircraft in absolutely appalling weather conditions, managing to get the all important hit that eventually led to the Bismark's demise. The previously mentioned mistaken attack on Sheffield also proving somewhat fortuitous as it highlighted the shortcomings of the magnetic-fused torpedoes, which were swapped out for old contact-based ones for the subsequent successful strike.
Obviously the remarkable success of this strike was also partly only possible due to the German's being even further behind in their appreciation of the importance of naval air power.
Digress aside, another fantastic model in progress!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Swordfish#Atl...
"The low speed of the attacking aircraft may have acted in their favour, as they were too slow for the fire-control predictors of the German gunners, whose shells exploded so far in front of the aircraft that the threat of shrapnel damage was greatly diminished. At least some of the Swordfish flew so low that most of Bismarck's flak weapons could not depress enough to hit them."
So there was a lot of luck involved. Who would have thought that using an obsolete aircraft could work in your favour? Respect to the aircrew.
dr_gn said:
Thanks for that. I found this on Wikipedea, about the Swordfish:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Swordfish#Atl...
"The low speed of the attacking aircraft may have acted in their favour, as they were too slow for the fire-control predictors of the German gunners, whose shells exploded so far in front of the aircraft that the threat of shrapnel damage was greatly diminished. At least some of the Swordfish flew so low that most of Bismarck's flak weapons could not depress enough to hit them."
So there was a lot of luck involved. Who would have thought that using an obsolete aircraft could work in your favour? Respect to the aircrew.
Indeed, and their incredibly low takeoff speed (comparative to newer monoplanes) meant that they could sometimes take off without the carrier even needing to sail into the wind. Their versatility kept them in service well after their intended replacement (and in fact through to the end of the war), but there is no doubting that they were well obsolete as a front line torpedo aircraft even at the start of the war.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Swordfish#Atl...
"The low speed of the attacking aircraft may have acted in their favour, as they were too slow for the fire-control predictors of the German gunners, whose shells exploded so far in front of the aircraft that the threat of shrapnel damage was greatly diminished. At least some of the Swordfish flew so low that most of Bismarck's flak weapons could not depress enough to hit them."
So there was a lot of luck involved. Who would have thought that using an obsolete aircraft could work in your favour? Respect to the aircrew.
As you say, the aircrew that flew them in those circumstances (and the Atlantic weather) deserve the utmost respect.
Edit to add: same goes for the carrier ground crew who looked after and armed the aircraft- I read somewhere that during the search sorties flown the previous day the deck had a rise & fall of 60 feet in the sea conditions. The 40 knt windspeed when the aircraft were returning meant the Ark Royal had to slow to just 8 knts or else the wind speed over the deck would have been up close to the Swordfish's 55 knt stall speed- risking them being blown back off of the deck whilst trying to land. Those were the conditions that those aircrew (in their open canopy biplanes) were going out in
Edited by Squirrelofwoe on Monday 25th November 14:37
Squirrelofwoe said:
dr_gn said:
Thanks for that. I found this on Wikipedea, about the Swordfish:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Swordfish#Atl...
"The low speed of the attacking aircraft may have acted in their favour, as they were too slow for the fire-control predictors of the German gunners, whose shells exploded so far in front of the aircraft that the threat of shrapnel damage was greatly diminished. At least some of the Swordfish flew so low that most of Bismarck's flak weapons could not depress enough to hit them."
So there was a lot of luck involved. Who would have thought that using an obsolete aircraft could work in your favour? Respect to the aircrew.
Indeed, and their incredibly low takeoff speed (comparative to newer monoplanes) meant that they could sometimes take off without the carrier even needing to sail into the wind. Their versatility kept them in service well after their intended replacement (and in fact through to the end of the war), but there is no doubting that they were well obsolete as a front line torpedo aircraft even at the start of the war.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Swordfish#Atl...
"The low speed of the attacking aircraft may have acted in their favour, as they were too slow for the fire-control predictors of the German gunners, whose shells exploded so far in front of the aircraft that the threat of shrapnel damage was greatly diminished. At least some of the Swordfish flew so low that most of Bismarck's flak weapons could not depress enough to hit them."
So there was a lot of luck involved. Who would have thought that using an obsolete aircraft could work in your favour? Respect to the aircrew.
As you say, the aircrew that flew them in those circumstances (and the Atlantic weather) deserve the utmost respect.
The torpedoes themselves were another reason the Swordfish stuck around so long- they had to be dropped at a relatively slow speed as a result of being essentially first world war technology, which suited the flight envelope of the Swordfish well. More modern designs which flew faster were at the limits of controllability when forced to fly slow enough to successfully air drop a British torpedo.
lufbramatt said:
The torpedoes themselves were another reason the Swordfish stuck around so long- they had to be dropped at a relatively slow speed as a result of being essentially first world war technology, which suited the flight envelope of the Swordfish well. More modern designs which flew faster were at the limits of controllability when forced to fly slow enough to successfully air drop a British torpedo.
The standard British air launched torpedo at the start of WW2 was the 18" MkXII, which had a tendency to lose it's tail at higher drop speeds until later versions were strengthened.This torpedo was a smaller version of the 21" MkVIII which had been in Royal Navy service since the late 1920s. Interestingly, this 21" MkVIII was itself a development of the even older MkIV which had started being used on Royal Navy ships (back when torpedos on large warships were still a thing) before WW1- HMS Hood still carried these old 1914 vintage MkIV torpedos at the start of WW2.
At the start of the war most nations were in a similar position with regards their air-launched torpedo tech, it was only the Japanese with their Type 91 that were noticeably ahead (and arguably the Italians too). By 1941 the Type 91 could be launched at speeds of over 180 knots, and was used successfully at Pear Harbour and the sinking of Prince of Wales and Repulse.
Despite this though, I'm pretty sure it was an improved version of the late 1920's MkVIII torpedo that sunk the General Belgrano in 1982- proving (if it were ever in doubt) that us Brit's really don't like throwing old things away!
all of the above based on a book I read a couple of years ago so my memory of numbers might be a little hazy in places!
It was all going so well...
Then I tried to fit the decks, and it all went wrong. I’d never glued paper parts of that size before, and the PVA I used screwed the paper; the water in it soaked through and wrinkled the whole lot. Couldn’t live with it so...
It took a surprising amount of physical and emotional effort to fold it up into a bin-sized ball, but there you go. So as of earlier this month, it’s shelf was empty:
I continued cutting hull sides out - part of the grieving process I suppose:
Before buying another - I contacted HMV, who very kindly sent another, which I’ve set about re-building:
I’d almost forgotten about the swastika masking, all of which had to be re-done. As of yesterday, pretty much back to where I was , 4 weeks lost:
This time it’ll be UHU for the decks...
Then I tried to fit the decks, and it all went wrong. I’d never glued paper parts of that size before, and the PVA I used screwed the paper; the water in it soaked through and wrinkled the whole lot. Couldn’t live with it so...
It took a surprising amount of physical and emotional effort to fold it up into a bin-sized ball, but there you go. So as of earlier this month, it’s shelf was empty:
I continued cutting hull sides out - part of the grieving process I suppose:
Before buying another - I contacted HMV, who very kindly sent another, which I’ve set about re-building:
I’d almost forgotten about the swastika masking, all of which had to be re-done. As of yesterday, pretty much back to where I was , 4 weeks lost:
This time it’ll be UHU for the decks...
El stovey said:
dr_gn said:
El stovey said:
Wow.
So is that you back where you were before the blue incident then?
Yup.So is that you back where you were before the blue incident then?
Gassing Station | Scale Models | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff