Naval History Forums

THE COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS OF GERMAN HEAVY TANK BATTALIONS IN WORLD WAR II A thesis presented to the Faculty of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF MILITARY ART AND SCIENCE Military History SUBJECT TERMS Combat effectivene...

yes fuzing of underwatertravel projectiels seems the most serious problem. Fuze action should start at penetration of plate, but not on impact on water. I dont have any plan for a reliable solution of this problem

SUPP 6 /481 is also the first british ballistic report wich mentions a horizontal protection of 6 inch for Bismarck-Class. Seems there were some additional findings in between 1942 CB 04039 Addendum 2 Ballistic protection (of british and german Battleships) and 1945 that led british experts to recal...

Thanks for info on wear of German 15 guns: none of the sources I have contain anything at all on wear. A 10% drop in MV corresponds to a lower limit of about 2420 ft/s, so that average MV might have been quite close to the average figure of 2575 ft/s for the British 15 in gun when supercharged. I a...

The Germans also found that they needed to restrict the hardness of the front of the shell somewhat to ensure intact penetration with a still functioning fuze. not only the germans british research on optimal hardness of cap/projectile brought conflicting requirements regarding hardness at low and ...

It talks about "unsteadiness of shells", tests having to be repeated, and shells going through "jump cards" before striking the plate. "Unsteadiness' sounds like yaw.

Due to shooting with reduced charge also the spin of projectile became decreased.

The difference in weight isn't going to make much difference vs cemented armour as the more important factor is velocity.

dave do you have a source?
Seems to me the formula used for Unterlagen zur Bestimmung Hauptkampfentfernung was using the energy aproach.

during the first dansk - hanseatic war 1362-65,
Christoffer son of the dansk king Waldemar IV. Atterdag was killed in action by a cannonball on 11th of june 1363 during a sea fight

just a question KBismarck states following Fuel: 8,294 metric tons Range: 9,280 nautical miles at 16 knots 8,900 nautical miles at 17 knots 8,525 nautical miles at 19 knots 6,640 nautical miles at 24 knots 4,500 nautical miles at 28 knots what is the source of this data is it known at wich rpm / hor...

ballistic mortar of Schießwolle 36 was about 130 with TNT =100

similar compositions were also used in german bombs like Fritz X

Flight time at 3 km is ~4 sec, I suspect its a direct shot, height of trajectory shouldnt exceed 15 m or so. danger space estimated ~360 m. It should be real hard to miss the target. probability for a hit can be expcted ~90% for a hit at main belt ~25% upper belt ~25% remainder superstructure but ge...

While I believe that the the German system of protection was extremely effective at close range as you describe, there is historic evidence that the Germans themselves were more pessimistic. They only communicate the calculated worst case scenario. They took only the available energy into account w...

At around 40 sec of flight time the target was able to leave the precalculated landing zone of the projectiles by own maneuver. This forces the enemy to increase dispersion artificial in range and deflection.

Its my personal opinion that Hood should stay at longer distances with 40-50 sec flightime for the projectiles to deal with the lower hit probability at such a distance. If Bismarck accepts a distant fight it has also to accept probably depleted ammo and the mission should be at least soft killed.

Quote from myself at the navweaps forum http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/209852/Best-overwater-protections-WWII-post-Treaties-BBs#reply-209852 "The thickness of the torpedobulkhead was completely 45 mm from ship bottom to 140 cm (corrected typo) above armored deck. Extending from...