What was the most powerful battleship in a straight duel, May 1941?
- Thread starter Freebird
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I think I read somewhere that the fire-control of the Bismarck was hit fatal right in the beginning of the fight. I look if I can find it again
Edit: Bismarck - The History - The Final Battle
Arsenal VG-33
Senior Airman
Ofcourse you are. There French.
I chose the Richelieu because I feel that had she been able to serve on the open seas as she was supposed to, she could have more than held her own. Same goes for the Jean Bart. I just happen to like the Strasbourg a little better. Another factor maybe is that I'm more familiar with those ships, so therefore the rule of "I go with what I know" sort of applies. And yes, the fact that they were French also makes me all giddy inside.
Personally speaking, I'm really not that fascinated with the Bismark as others are. While not a battleship (and for that reason not one the list), a German vessel I would gladly choose over Bismark is the Graf Spee.
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
In may 1941, NORTH CAROLINA has no radar and lot´s of vibration troubles to be sorted out. It was limited to 24 Kts top speed or the sensible equipement (rangefinders and radar) was rendered unservicable.
Richelieu in may 1941 has two out of eight main guns unservicable and did not received a full ammunition complement. It also suffers from incomplete firecontrollsuites and lot´s of minor troubles. Had France not disappeared, Richelieu might well have been worked up enough to become servicable but historically in may 1941, she wasn´t.
And that´s what I disagree, seriously. Our reports show clearly that the opposite is the case. Radar rangings from KGV´s and PoW´s radar sets had to be called down into the FC room (correspondingly no radar rangings contributed to their firing solutions) while Bismarck´s FC was the first to enjoi integrated radar and optical ranging fed into the analogous computer by wires. The observer just discriminated the target on the stereoscopic rangefinder or marked it on the radarset and the range readings were automaticly fed into the FC computer. Bismarck is a candidate to have used radar directed blindfire against Cossack in the night before it´s final battle for the first time ever in a naval engagement. Altough this was definetely something beyond it´s radar capabilities and has been catsed in doubt as this is based mostly on assumptions from Cossacks crew. You have not shown that UK gunnery by may 1941 was up to Bismarck´s standarts. Battle records are showing a different picture. Individual differences are notable. Hoods FC did not even straddled Bismarck, altough seasoned while PoW´s FC, beeing accused for green crews, did made a better job in zeroing in than any other UK gunnery crew, they just lacked the ability to keep a good firing solution.
[/quote]The situation was completely different in the 2 engagements, the first (in calm seas) resulted in both sides scoring hits, with significant damage to the German BB, some damage to the POW and one (catastrophic!) hit on the Hood.[/quote] You are again selective in perception. Hits are only statistical sideaspects from straddles. A good gunnery crew achieved repeated straddles and sometimes a hit resulted from those. Even a perfect aiming point does not ensure hits due to dispersion issues. Scoring hits is a serious non starter for comparing gunnery.
To put Your significant damage on Bismarck into context: One hit went through the bow, deleting part of the forward fuel buncerage, one hit went under the belt, detonating on the torpedo bulkhead, leading to the flooding of an auxilary engine room nearby. One hit went on the boat deck and was deflected away. It eventually damaged some compressed airlines. No crews were injured. NONE OF THE COMBAT RELATED ASPECTS SUFFERED from these hits. Ship controll, firecontroll, gunnery, propulsion, navigation, all remained intact. Now what happened on PoW? One hit went under the belt and lead to minor flooding but was stopped by the torpedo bulkhead without detonation. One hit went on the aft funnel basement, rupturing exhoust lines and started a fire. One hit went through the forward rangefinder, disabling it, one through the combat bridge, killing everybody on station except Captn. Leach (injured) and another one. Another hit went through the aft superstructures without notable effect, two hits were on the waterline aft, contributing to local flooding. As an effect of the aforementioned hits and basic gunnery breakdowns, PoW was deprived of ship controll, firecontroll, gunnery and limited to 26 Kts at the very time it turned away. That´s some serious damage to her combat related aspects. BTW, Bismarck did not scored just one hit on Hood. Bismarck scored from her 3rd and 5th salvo achieving straddles from the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th salvo.
Indeed. But keep in mind that they achieved 3 straddles under aft firecontroll when main and secondary FC was disabled, already. They are reported to have achieved two straddles on local turret controll, too. Rodney estimated in her after action report that the second salvo fired from Bismarck would have straddled her had she not previously engaged salvo chasing maneuvers.
Good post (as always) Delc.
Based on that info, I'm going with the Bismark. That is very good shooting. Especially impressed with the automatic updates to the gunnery solution by the radar. That is very slick for 1941.
It has always bothered me that the Admiral in charge of the British BB/BC at the Battle of the Denmark Straights didn't:
1. Switch the Hood and the POW in position, putting the ship with better armor and less experience in the lead. It seems senseable. Anybody know why he didn't do that, other than the obvious flagship in the lead custom.
2. Get the Norfolk and Suffolk into the fight as well, causing the German ships to split their fire between two opposing forces.
I am aware of the navigational error that brought the British ships into action on a slow, side closing course rather than head to head, as was desired.
Just seems the battle was set up to give the German ships the best shot at survival (unintentional, I am sure). Or, put another way, the plan went to hell in a handbasket in no time.
Based on that info, I'm going with the Bismark. That is very good shooting. Especially impressed with the automatic updates to the gunnery solution by the radar. That is very slick for 1941.
It has always bothered me that the Admiral in charge of the British BB/BC at the Battle of the Denmark Straights didn't:
1. Switch the Hood and the POW in position, putting the ship with better armor and less experience in the lead. It seems senseable. Anybody know why he didn't do that, other than the obvious flagship in the lead custom.
2. Get the Norfolk and Suffolk into the fight as well, causing the German ships to split their fire between two opposing forces.
I am aware of the navigational error that brought the British ships into action on a slow, side closing course rather than head to head, as was desired.
Just seems the battle was set up to give the German ships the best shot at survival (unintentional, I am sure). Or, put another way, the plan went to hell in a handbasket in no time.
Njaco
The Pop-Tart Whisperer
Tim, did Prinz Eugen take on Norfolk and Suffolk? That may be why.
Njaco, just did a little reading up on the Battle of the Denmark Straight. The original plan was for the Suffolk and Norfolk to take on the Prince Eugen but they never got the message from the Admiral in charge of the Hood/POW force.
Evidently, when the shooting started between the Hood/POW and the Bismark/Prince Eugen, the Norfolk kicked it in gear and moved into the firght. Shortly after the Hood blew up, the Norfolk fired 3 salvos at the Bismark. But that was pretty much it.
Here's a link to the write, looks pretty thorough:
http://www.kbismarck.com/ds-barticle.pdf
Evidently, when the shooting started between the Hood/POW and the Bismark/Prince Eugen, the Norfolk kicked it in gear and moved into the firght. Shortly after the Hood blew up, the Norfolk fired 3 salvos at the Bismark. But that was pretty much it.
Here's a link to the write, looks pretty thorough:
http://www.kbismarck.com/ds-barticle.pdf
Glider
Captain
Considering the lack of training and the appalling reliability of the quad turrets the POW did well to get the hits she did and achieve the main aim which was to turn the Bismark back and force her to abandon her mission. A lot of the time the POW only had the twin turret firing.
As Delc says where a ship is hit at a long range target is down to luck, you aim to hit the ship. Had the Bismark been hit in the rangefinder then I have no doubt it would have been knocked out and the same goes for the Battle Bridge. The Bismark did lose speed as a result of the POW hits and she was down by the bow by a noticable amount.
If the POW had been fully worked up then I believe that she would have done better. The Quad turrets remained unreliable almost until the end of the war.
The ship that I went for was the Nelson. At the time she was the first BB to be fitted with the type 284 fire control radar. This radar was used by the Duke of York to sink the Scharnhorst, firing blind, at night, in a storm. It may not have been as slick as the Bismark, but there is no doubt that it was a very capable FCS radar.
The Nelson was worked up, her 16in guns were now reliable and her armour more substantial in many ways than the POW. In a straight fight it would be close and probably down to the luck factor that has been mentioned, but I would still back the Nelson.
As Delc says where a ship is hit at a long range target is down to luck, you aim to hit the ship. Had the Bismark been hit in the rangefinder then I have no doubt it would have been knocked out and the same goes for the Battle Bridge. The Bismark did lose speed as a result of the POW hits and she was down by the bow by a noticable amount.
If the POW had been fully worked up then I believe that she would have done better. The Quad turrets remained unreliable almost until the end of the war.
The ship that I went for was the Nelson. At the time she was the first BB to be fitted with the type 284 fire control radar. This radar was used by the Duke of York to sink the Scharnhorst, firing blind, at night, in a storm. It may not have been as slick as the Bismark, but there is no doubt that it was a very capable FCS radar.
The Nelson was worked up, her 16in guns were now reliable and her armour more substantial in many ways than the POW. In a straight fight it would be close and probably down to the luck factor that has been mentioned, but I would still back the Nelson.
- Thread starter
- #29
Freebird
Master Sergeant
Neither of these ships were in "proper condition", granted. IF there had been some emergency {such as an attack} they might have been called out in that condition, much as the PoW was called out before it had been properly worked up. I included them in the poll for balance and assuming they had been fixed in May 1941, but for purists just ignore them.
delcyros said:
I'm comparing the Bismarck's fire control to that of the Nelson, not the Prince of Wales. Obviously not all British BB's could be fitted with the newest fire control at the same time.
delcyros said:
True, the hits on a BB are random. On the other hand in engagements against Bismarck and the Italian BB's none of the British BB's were put out of action, including the PoW. The Hood, of course, being a Battlecruiser should never have been put in an engagement against a Battleship. {lessons not learned in WWI}
No and I didn't say that the PoW didn't take some serious damage, although the ship was still available for action that day, and continued in the persuit until she ran low on fuel. Bismarck on the other hand, was forced to abandon the sortie against shipping, due to fuel loss contamination from seawater. Which was the whole point from the British point of view, to prevent Bismarck from making it into the Atlantic. Also note that the "minor hit" prevented Bismarck from steaming at full speed because of damage the fuel situation. {to prevent the contamination from worsening}
- Thread starter
- #30
Freebird
Master Sergeant
There does seem to be some patriotism at work here. As I said earlier, it's too bad that events didn't let the French BB's show their full potential. Delcyros I see you picked the Littorio, I'd be interested to hear your opinions on the Italian ships. If this had been summer 1940 instead of 1941, it might be a whole different story, no Bismarck, no K.G.V.
Glider
Captain
I admit that I like the Littorio, in fact I like most of the Italian Navy. What lets them down isn't the ships, speed, weapons or armour ,its because technically they were not up to scratch. They lacked radar and their FCS were not as good as the rest.
Why couldnt BISMARK shoot down ANY of the SWORDFISH? It was such a SLOW aircraft
The reason I dont like the Richelieu is because of the layout of her main guns.
While it had advantages such as saving weight and enabling her to fire all her main armament from the foward position while closing on enemy ships, it was also a big disadvantage in the fact that one well placed round could take all her main armament.
Same with the Dunkerque Class.
Arsenal VG-33
Senior Airman
Well, the inherent risk for all kinds of machinery is that the entire thing can be ruined/destroyed by a single small object. They're more exceptions than the norm I think. A single armored-piercing bomb effectively destroyed the USS Arizona. In Vietnam, the VC discovered that a well placed 0.02 cent bullet could destroy a multi-million dollar aircraft. Look at what a well placed torpedo did to the Bismarck's steering.
There's no doubt the Richelieu had her weak points, as did the Bismarck. Thats why it is interesting in examining ships from different countries, as they are built with specific threats in mind. Each vessel having a marked advantage other others, as well as a weakness. With so many factors involved in keeping large warships afloat, armed, and well protected, sacrifices will be made somewhere, and some things may even be overlooked.
Arsenal VG-33
Senior Airman
Perhaps someone will correct me if necessary, but I vaguely remember reading something about the Bismarcks AA systems being designed to rotate quickly to effectively counter the threat of fast and modern fighters/torpedo planes. As the Swordfish was so slow, I think the AA crews had difficulties in keeping their sights trained on the biplanes, as the guns kept over-correcting. Again, I could be wrong, but thats what I recall reading somewhere. I think maybe I heard Dr. Ballard say something about this, I'm not sure.
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
So You are taking Bismarck´s gunnery at her final battle as representative with the conditions of the engagement? I take this as a methodical mistake. Comparing Bismarck with PoW is more even. PoW´s gunnery was excellent, if not outstanding at danmark street and deserves to be mentioned in this capacity. Rodneys after action report notes that Bismarck´s 2nd salvo would have straddled her, not bad, too.
Rodney´s FC was very good. But it´s excellence derives from the more advanced radarset rather than from the FC, itselve.
There are a number of reasons to classify Hood as the worlds first fast battleship. It features wwI design charackteristics. But unlike the ww1 BC´s, it has BB -style armement and even better armour protection than any ww1 BB. It combines firepower, protection and excellent speed for the costs of excessive displacement, much like the later Iowas from a design layout point of view.
I would also like to stress that BB engagements were not happening often enough to draw statistical conclusions from them.
What do You think would have happened to PoW if Lutjens had allowed Lindemann to keep fighting PoW? It was Lutjens decision, which safed PoW in her critical condition. By all definition, PoW was crippled (ship controll and main gunnery temporarely out of action, secondary guns on local = ineffective controll) and deprived from it´s ability to shoot back or disengage when she turned away. In fact, Bismarck was the only ship of the dreadnought era that had the best opportunity to sink two enemy capital ships in the same engagement. I am not saying that this is typical. The destruction of HMS Hood was unlucky and the engagement could easily have outturned with Bismarck resting on the seabed.
Bismarck, btw, was not forced to abandon the sortie by this engagement. Had it been, she would have returned to Norway. What ended her sortie was the successful shadowing of HMS Suffolk afterwards, which prevented Bismarck from breaking free to refuel on Altmark in the North Atlantic until it was to late. Suffolk would have accomplished this task with or without HMS Prince of Wales. From this point of view the UK strategy failed at danmark street. Prinz Eugen continued his raid in the North Atlantic after refueling on Altmark -even if he didn´t found targets.
Bismarck´s speed was not directly influenced by the hit. It could still mainten it´s designed max speed of 29 Kts (altough the enforced 30 Kts top speed would have become impossible due to bow list) throughout the engagement and reduced it´s speed after action in order to conserve fuel. This is intentional, not enforced.
Considering the design of Littorio, the ship was excellent. As Glider has pointed out above, there were a number of drawbacks such as mediocre FC and unreliable italian APC-shells but her guns were arguably the most powerful of all in competition and her armour was tougher than most (thanks to superior italian face hardened armour and the successful use of decapping plates, her decks were weaker but still good enough for the combat distances envisioned). Of course, the Littorio class is a suboptimal "atlantic" BB and would have been terribly handicapped by low stability and short endurance but for the conditions envisioned -the calm mediterranean theatre of action- she looks very promising.
Very well said, Arsenal. The reason I didn´t voted for Richelieu is a single one: Inacceptable large dispersion patterns of her main battery. Straddling somthing would be easy with a mean dispersion of 1.450 - 1.700 m but hitting a completely different matter (You would need staistically six times more straddles in Richelieu to land a hit on BB sized targets than in Hood or Bismarck). I prefer ships which could land closely spaced salvo patterns like the UK 15"/42, the US 16"/45 or the german 15"/52 in a one on one engagement.
It had actually nothing to do with the rotation or tracking. The 4.1"/65 was actually a dual purpose gun. If it could track ships, it shouldn´t experience these kind of tracking deficiancies if engaging slow airplanes. The problem was the fuze setting of the AA-round. The AA curtain deployed behind the planes as the dely fuzing was designed for faster approach speeds. This was recitified in 1941.
best regards,
delc
machine shop tom
Senior Airman
- 504
- Apr 13, 2007
Let's not ignore the Nagato. The 16" guns were among the best of the day, and the Japanese (at that time) were still the masters of the Pacific. The armor protection was well-designed and effective. And those pagoda masts were darned intimidating. Just ask the fellas in Taffy 3.
tom
tom
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
I finally voted for Nagato....
Nagato, Kirishima, Ise and Hyuga....
And some cool pics of Nagato, Saratoga and a few other ships today at the Bikini Atoll:
"Deepscape Photography â€" Shipwrecks in Bikini Atoll, Saratoga, Nagato, Lamson, Anderson, Carlisle. James Lee, underwater, shipwreck, nature photographer." />
Nagato, Kirishima, Ise and Hyuga....
And some cool pics of Nagato, Saratoga and a few other ships today at the Bikini Atoll:
"Deepscape Photography â€" Shipwrecks in Bikini Atoll, Saratoga, Nagato, Lamson, Anderson, Carlisle. James Lee, underwater, shipwreck, nature photographer." />
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Yamashiro in Tokyo Bay, Japan, after 1935.
Behind her are the battleships Fuso and Haruna (most distant). Faintly visible in the right distance are two cruisers and an aircraft carrier.
Glider
Captain
The following is a good description of the last voyage of the Bismark with good descriptions of the battles.
The whole site gives a good description of the Vessel in great detail and I commend it to anyone.
KBismarck.com - Operation Rheinbung
The whole site gives a good description of the Vessel in great detail and I commend it to anyone.
KBismarck.com - Operation Rheinbung
