That nazi battleship did put on quite a chase. The outcome in the end was a good one, otherwise she probably would have interfered with supplies to our friends the Brits, which would have furthered the nazi cause.
thank goodness she was impotent when they caught up with her...
Search found 408 matches
- Fri Jun 01, 2012 1:14 am
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Bismarck's 71st anniversary
- Replies: 19
- Views: 8703
- Sat May 26, 2012 3:27 am
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Stern chasing
- Replies: 41
- Views: 8233
Re: Stern chasing
yellowtail: some quarters, criticism of Lutjens is popular because practitioners think the Admiral cheated Bismarck out of greater glory - !if not fore Lutjuns, Bismarck would have sunk PoW and the RN cruisers, then wreaked havoc in the Atlantic, kept Hitler from Russia, and ....NAND... And...' ......
- Fri May 25, 2012 10:35 pm
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Stern chasing
- Replies: 41
- Views: 8233
Re: Stern chasing
The assault by Hood & PoW caught Lutjens in a very risky situation that he was forced to deal with - he came under attack and had to fight it out - i.e. he had no choice in that matter. Once the British attack ended with Hood sunk and PoW in retreat the immediate risk to his two ships was over....
- Fri May 25, 2012 12:19 pm
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Bismarck construction flaws
- Replies: 397
- Views: 288740
Re: Bismarck construction flaws
Karl, you mentioned that the Iowa had only sunk a trawler. To what do you attribute that? Was she... too slow to catch anything else? Were her guns insufficiently powerful to sink anything else? What?
- Fri May 25, 2012 12:12 pm
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Bismarck construction flaws
- Replies: 397
- Views: 288740
Re: Bismarck construction flaws
Just be happy, that people have started, thanks to the contributers mentioned above, to reevaluate BS from mediocre to a very good design. (shrug) I think it was a pretty capable ship. I don't think that there's all that much diff between WW2 battleships as some folks thing. None of them were guara...
- Fri May 25, 2012 4:40 am
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Bismarck construction flaws
- Replies: 397
- Views: 288740
Re: Bismarck construction flaws
Fanboy? I'm not trying to impress you, Karl, and I don't know how to answer that 'time machines' crack - have you been drinking?
- Fri May 25, 2012 3:46 am
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Bismarck construction flaws
- Replies: 397
- Views: 288740
Re: Bismarck construction flaws
yellowtail: Exception... I think the South Dakotas were somewhat better ships, if we're measuring by the pound (or kilo) and they were a little smaller. Not a a great diff, but enough to make that exception... a notable exception. Otherwise.. when it comes to warships, guns, horsepower, and bank ac...
- Thu May 24, 2012 11:50 pm
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Bismarck construction flaws
- Replies: 397
- Views: 288740
Re: Bismarck construction flaws
@yellowtail Why an eexception? They had neither the largest nor the most guns Which of the larger BB's proved it's ccapabilities againstso many other BB'S Regards Ede Exception... I think the South Dakotas were somewhat better ships, if we're measuring by the pound (or kilo) and they were a little ...
- Thu May 24, 2012 3:44 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Tirpitz shelling New York
- Replies: 132
- Views: 43695
Re: Tirpitz shelling New York
Ah.... that Washington. I was thinking of the Washington that was sinkex'd in the early 20s, one of the Colorados. That would have been an apt comparison to the Baden... and my money would be on that old Washington, too (assuming she was completed).
- Thu May 24, 2012 5:44 am
- Forum: Bismarck General Discussion
- Topic: Bismarck construction flaws
- Replies: 397
- Views: 288740
Re: Bismarck construction flaws
Well, regarding battleships, bigger generally is better; Bismarck & Tirpitz are an exception to that generality...ede144 wrote:regards
ede
PS It might be strange for Americans, but more and bigger is not always better :-)
- Wed May 23, 2012 12:55 am
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Tirpitz shelling New York
- Replies: 132
- Views: 43695
Re: Tirpitz shelling New York
No, they aren't bogus, just that things are more complicated. I understand, alecsandros, and can appreciate that - but in fact, they're nowhere near as complicated as you're making them out to be. Most of us here are interested in this stuff - how hard, how far, how much, which shell is x percent b...
- Tue May 22, 2012 12:41 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Tirpitz shelling New York
- Replies: 132
- Views: 43695
Re: Tirpitz shelling New York
I posted the US EFF limit for comparsisons of armor penetration capabilities. THe British 14"/L45 could perforate 16.8" of armor at 20000 yards, while the US 14"/L50 - 15 inches of armor . Well... that oughta to be enough to prevent Tirpitz from shelling Manhatten! You're thinking al...
- Tue May 22, 2012 2:09 am
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Tirpitz shelling New York
- Replies: 132
- Views: 43695
Re: Tirpitz shelling New York
for comparison with US 14"/L50 and US 16"/L45 2240lbs: http://www.navweaps.com/index_nathan/Penetration_United_States.htm Look at "US EFF", distance 20000 yards for all guns . I looked at it, though I'm not sure what to make of it. Is this explaining how the USN's 14"/50 AP...
- Mon May 21, 2012 7:53 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Tirpitz shelling New York
- Replies: 132
- Views: 43695
Re: Tirpitz shelling New York
would be BIsmarck, except she couldn't hold course due to gimpy stern I would greatly appreciate to know more about the meaning of "gimpy stern". Some kind of phrase or something meaningful?Thanks. Glad to clarify, as gimpy is meant to be descriptive. It means... injured, weakened, damage...
- Mon May 21, 2012 1:32 pm
- Forum: Hypothetical Naval Scenarios
- Topic: Tirpitz shelling New York
- Replies: 132
- Views: 43695
Re: Tirpitz shelling New York
Leaving aside that prolly no 14"/45s hit... what does this tell you? That fourteen (and sixteen!) inch guns are weak reeds, or that a battleship can take a lot of punishment before sinking? It was more likely a problem with the shells. Older US shells tended to behave badly in high obliquity (...