Search found 34 matches
- Thu Jun 22, 2017 12:09 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Richelieu vs. Bismarck
- Replies: 25
- Views: 15617
Re: Richelieu vs. Bismarck
I believe that training standards would be overshadowed by technical differences in this case.
- Sun Jun 18, 2017 6:38 am
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Richelieu vs. Bismarck
- Replies: 25
- Views: 15617
Re: Richelieu vs. Bismarck
Japanese 14" and 16" had this feature originally, but it was actually removed during their refits. The British always used shallow angles for their 15" in the end. Any capability usually comes with engineering compromises, be it weight, complexity or reliability. At that time, any-ang...
- Sun Apr 02, 2017 12:04 am
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Alaska Class vs Dunkquerke Class
- Replies: 24
- Views: 13385
Re: Alaska Class vs Dunkquerke Class
Not quite the case here. In C.B. 04039 + Addendum 2(1942), relatively long ranges were recommended for an advantage in armour penetration (it is noted that other considerations may be as important): Between 22000 and 26000yd, Nelson immune while Tirpitz vulnerable to 16" deck hits. Between 2200...
- Wed Mar 29, 2017 11:16 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Alaska Class vs Dunkquerke Class
- Replies: 24
- Views: 13385
Re: Alaska Class vs Dunkquerke Class
There would be a lot of guesswork involved. German fighting recommendations Bismarck vs Nelson: 12-16km for decisive battle, maintain an angle of at least 30°. Effective AP fire possible against turrets and barbettes out to 24km, but own deck penetration may become a factor past 23km; no correspondi...
- Tue Mar 28, 2017 10:52 am
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Alaska Class vs Dunkquerke Class
- Replies: 24
- Views: 13385
Re: Alaska Class vs Dunkquerke Class
In case of a large speed advantage, the faster side can dictate the range. In the case of Bismarck vs. Rodney, this gives Bismarck several options, such as a) Close the range to a point where Bismarck's vitals are immune but Rodney's aren't, accepting varying and unclear conditions in the meantime. ...
- Wed Jan 18, 2017 8:49 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Bismarck and Iowa
- Replies: 49
- Views: 25933
Re: Bismarck and Iowa
Re comparison of shell effects, it can also be argued that optimizing the number and velocity of projectile fragments may not be as important as ensuring that a projectile whose detonation can produce a sufficient number of effective fragments is physically able reach a critical location within the...
- Sun Jan 15, 2017 5:27 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Bismarck and Iowa
- Replies: 49
- Views: 25933
Re: Bismarck and Iowa
@spicmart: Bismarck's torpedo defense system was rated to withstand 250kg of TNT, expectation was that damage inwards of the TDS from larger explosions would be contained rather than prevented - Bismarck featured extensive subdivision. The rating seems quite conservative; German assumptions of the t...
- Sun Jan 15, 2017 1:42 am
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Bismarck and Iowa
- Replies: 49
- Views: 25933
Re: Bismarck and Iowa
Not getting into metallurgy since the question was about the design. The Germans made few assumptions about expected combat distances. The armour scheme was an attempt to give Bismarck's embedded vitals good protection in a wide range of scenarios, which the Germans thought impossible with a single ...
- Sun Sep 04, 2016 9:56 am
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: May 24 1941 - Tirpitz v Prince of Wales
- Replies: 177
- Views: 44733
Re: May 24 1941 - Tirpitz v Prince of Wales
Sorry for being pedantic... but there are a few nits to pick. Are the 38cm going to hurt more? The British at least were fairly convinced that damage potential depended almost exclusively on the strength of the bursting charge, the British 14"AP shell carried a larger one than the German 38cm e...
- Tue May 17, 2016 7:14 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Hood v Vittorio Veneto
- Replies: 559
- Views: 63520
Re: Hood v Vittorio Veneto
I think he referred to something different. A shell slightly more short will bypass the inclined belt before it gets under the vertical belt, just shift the trajectory to the right (or down, same thing here) and it becomes readily apparent. A vertical belt of the same height (measured perpendicular ...
- Fri Feb 05, 2016 5:30 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Hood v Vittorio Veneto
- Replies: 559
- Views: 63520
Re: Hood v Vittorio Veneto
I know it's a nitpick, but people keep pointing out that 9 is more than 8. Four twins were considered more effective than three triples - practical RoF (coordination and hoist arrangements), turret whip, in-flight interference, disturbance by blast and smoke, desired salvo distribution and so on. No...
- Sun Jun 01, 2014 7:18 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Tirpitz vs South Dakota according to German sources
- Replies: 26
- Views: 15282
Re: Tirpitz vs South Dakota according to German sources
Against Nelson: Main combat range of 12-16km, stay at an angle around 30°. Effective fire still possible, especially hits on turrets and barbettes, at 16-24km. At distances longer than 23km, own deck may become vulnerable without a corresponding weakness of the enemy. Use AP for decisive hits. For H...
- Thu May 22, 2014 7:47 am
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: KGV sorties with POW
- Replies: 147
- Views: 27791
Re: KGV sorties with POW
As far as I know:
Permission to fire requested several times... and not given by Lütjens.
In the end, Lindemann went over his head with the comment of "I'm not having my ship shot from under my arse".
Permission to fire requested several times... and not given by Lütjens.
In the end, Lindemann went over his head with the comment of "I'm not having my ship shot from under my arse".
- Wed May 14, 2014 8:47 am
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: KGV sorties with POW
- Replies: 147
- Views: 27791
Re: KGV sorties with POW
Sinking a modern battleship isn't a trivial task even if you manage to knock it out of combat. It would probably require torpedos, which most battleships didn't carry because the hazards outweighed the benefit. 2 KGVs would be a very tall order for Bismarck, one alone was a credible opponent. Larger...
- Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:58 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Scharnhorst vs a KGV
- Replies: 62
- Views: 26718
Re: Scharnhorst vs a KGV
The British at least thought damage potential was simply a matter of having a powerful bursting charge, and that the metal didn't matter much. Did anyone else research this in detail, and come to different conclusions? Also, do we have anything about how this expected damage would scale, with respec...