Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I assume that 'Highball' was given back spin like 'Upkeep' to keep it against the hull of the target ship as it sunk and prevent it bouncing off. It would have been possible to fuse it to explode at a predetermined and suitable depth, just like 'Upkeep' against the dam wall.
Exploding a bomb against the side of a Battleship would in general have had limited effect it would take a great many hits, just as a great many torpedo hits would be required, the shock might have hurt a crew member to close, but the structure would stay intact. The armour scheme of a German battleship was as follows: they had a particularly thick armoured belt against the waterline designed to stop massive armour piercing shells of another battleship. German battleships were particularly strong in this regard as the Germans expected to be fighting at short to medium ranges in the poor visibility of the north sea and Atlantic where low trajectory high velocity shells would be the norm. Thick wood and cavities behind provided protection against torpedos and of course bombs such as highball blowing up against the side. Just above the main belt, just above the waterline was a thick (about 6 inches) armour like a tortoishell designed to stop plunging shells or those shells that had penetrated the weaker armour above the waterline. There was another layer of about 3-4 inches of armour in the upper deck. This duel layer of armour was designed to keep the center of gravity low, decap an incoming shell, defuse it, and also yaw it so that it would glance of the tortoishell armour.
However exploding below the water line would likely cause more damage, this could be achieved with a hydrostatic fuse, or perhaps less effectively with a time delay fuse that started timing on impact.
A deep detonation of high ball would have caused enormous damage, not an immediate sinking but certainly a crippling. Unlike a torpedo it could be deli vered at high speed, unlike a bomb it didn't have to be released at an exact range.
Tirpitz wasn't really operational in 1944 when it was sunk. It had been too badly damaged by repeated bombing raids etc, however it did distract the Royal Navy and Air force who were obsessed with getting her.
The anti aircraft defences were reasonably good by then, the Germans upgraded as did everyone else, the biggest weakness being the insufficient armour protection for the gunners. A problem with all battleships since for some bizarre reason Navy planners hadn't conceived of fighter planes strafing up the decks of ships to clear the way for torpedo and dive bombers. Tirpitz at sea would have been far more formable than Bismarck in her FLAK defences.
The German "version" of highball was code named "kurt"
Highball was not designed to explode against the side of a ship. Instead, like Upkeep, it was to sink below the surface with the backspin holding the mine in close contact with the ships hole and explode via hydrostatic fuzes.
Going too deep would have lessened the explosive effect. The whole point of the weapon was to have it remain in contact with the hull so that the easiest path for the explosive shock to take was through the ship.
Highball would still need to be released within certain parameters of speed, height and range, otherwise it wouldn't work.
You could argue that the Tirpitz wasn't really ever operational. To the best of my knowledge the Tirpitz only had one combat sortie - against a shore weather station. The Tirpitz did pose a threat to the supply convoys to Russia, which is why the obsession.
That may be, but the Tirpitz was basically paralysed after the Bismark was sunk.
We know.
Rocket boosters were added to Kurt to project it ahead of the Fw 190 fighter bomber since there was a danger that a bomb could bounce back into the aircraft. I thought for some reason highball was immune from this effect due to spin but, as per your posted link, a Douglass A-26 was destroyed in tests this way so it must have been more serious concern.
One of the problems facing any attack against the Tirpitz was its location. The sheer cliffs either side of it, coupled with the most extensive anti-torpedo netting, smoke machines, EW defences and nearly a full flak regiment defending it ruled out most types of low level attack, whether it be a torpedo attack, a low level dive-bomber attack, or a low level "skip bombing" attack, or this near equivalent, an attack by Lancasters carrying specially developed low level ordinance. A side hit, or plunging fire would not have sunk a ship as sophisticated as the Tirpitz but would still have done a lot of damage, and as the germans found, repairing ships far from good facilities took a long time to complete. There were reasons for the timing of the constant attacks on her. She was never allowed to become operational for any length of time, but the germans were equally careful never to expose her to unreasonable risk. She managed to tie down enormous forces for 2 years though hitlers constant rantings showed that he failed to appreciate the "fleet in being" role that she so successfully completed. The loss of the Scharnhorst points to one alternative. the wholesale scrapping or laying up of much of the german surface fleet after the fiasco of 31 December 1942 points to the other likely fate.
Tirpitz completed a thankless and unglamorous mission superbly.
Tirpitz - Kåfjord, near Alta, Norway - Then Now
The Fleet air arm effectively ran riot during operation Tungstan using Barracuda dive bombers and staffing Corsairs...
First time I read of Corsairs were used in Operation Tungsten.