Bismarck and her contemporaries

[Tiornu]

Under the right circumstances, a 1000-lb bomb could be dangerous to a battleship. The two Yamatos absorbed many hits, and in a couple cases the damage extended beneath even their 8in deck armor. The difference between the hits that caused heavy damage and those that didn't? Chance.
Most of the bombs that hit Tirpitz were 500-pounders that would not be much of a threat to a modern battleship. Some 1000-lb bombs scored hits, but I think these came from fighters rather than divebombers. About five hits came from 1600-lb bombs; one of these exploded against the armor deck and another actually penetrated the armor deck but failed to explode. While these hits might raise suspicions, I don't think they represent a usable sample.

[Karl Heidenreich]

In order to evaluate the WW2 Torpedo Defense Systems we could go here:

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-047.htm

Best regards

[Serg]

If Bismarck was hit in main belt only by three heavy shells possibly that the total number of hits was negligible. IIRC, fragment from british report which was published in british battleships of ww2 asserts that Rodney had at least 40 16" hits. In last phase Rodney concentrated own fire on waterline. On the other hand is well-known fact that Bismarck was deeply in water and had a list that submerge the belt. Lutzov was hit by ~30 shells at Jutland, and only 4 was on main belt. With this ratio, it seems, necessary to revise the number of heavy hits downward, e.g at most 40 hits.

[Bgile]

Some people have suggested that at the extremely short range at which Rodney was firing, shells which landed short would have ricocheted off the water instead of submerging.

[Laurenz]

seem to be stronger than Scharnhost's.
On british heavy bomb went through 5 decks of Scharnhorst without exploding.
But the British gave up the idea to sink Tirpitz with common bombs.
Kind regards,
L.

[RF]

Some people have suggested that at the extremely short range at which Rodney was firing, shells which landed short would have ricocheted off the water instead of submerging.

Which makes the ''yorker'' shot even more devastating - as Nelson realised at the battle of Copenhagen....

[Laurenz]

Dear Sirs.
i read somewhere here about the damages in the midshipmen logis on Renown caused by combat with Scharnhorst.

Some people have suggested that at the extremely short range at which Rodney was firing, shells which landed short would have ricocheted off the water instead of submerging.

was it the same story?
Kind regards,
L.

[dunmunro]

Let´s see displacement:

Bismarck standard: 41,700 tons
Bismarck full: 50,900 tons

Hood standard: 42,000 tons
Hood full: 49,000 tons

KGV standard: 39,000 tons
KGV full: 44,000 tons



Very best regards.

I don't like to nitpick, but the the KGV and PoW displaced about 36,700 tons in 1941, and her full load displacement was about 42,200 tons.

[Ramius]

I have to agree with most of what I've heard here, Bismarck was a very nicely designed BB and could have a good brawl with all of her contemporaries (discluding Yamato which was built for the purpose just to have a BB killer, and the Iowas which were created through a spending capacity that only America could accomplish)
Another thing I agree with is with adequate leadership Bismarck could have gone far. No offense to anyone, but Lutjens was a complete moron who didn't know when to take chances and keep his big mouth shut to Group North. I say this is one of the prime moments in history where the commanding figure was directly responsible for the destruction of their ship. Lindeman knew what he was doing...
"I will not have my ship shot out from under my ass" ( )

[Karl Heidenreich]

Ramius:

No offense to anyone, but Lutjens was a complete moron who didn't know when to take chances and keep his big mouth shut to Group North. I say this is one of the prime moments in history where the commanding figure was directly responsible for the destruction of their ship. Lindeman knew what he was doing...
"I will not have my ship shot out from under my ass"

Of course you´re right about it. A ship is more than bolts and rivets and formulas to enjoy ourselves. A good commander can take the unfavourable odds and create a victory. Look at Nelson.

Best regards.

[dunmunro]

I think you are far to quick to dismiss Lutjens as being incompetent. On what basis do you make such statements?

[RF]

I don't think personal abuse of Lutjens - long dead and not able to answer back - is very helpful.

As I have already stated eleswhere I don't think he was the right man to be Fleet Commander for Rheinubung. That doesn't mean that Lutjens was stupid or incompetent. Far from it he was very politically savvy, which is likely to be very much why he was constrained to follow Raeder's orders as literally as possible. The fact that Raeder's orders were too constricting was not Lutjen's fault.

[Burner]

Lutjen was the perfekt man for this job. He really knew how to think outside the box.

[Ramius]

Lutjens was a fine commander, and as you said, he was taking his orders a little too seriously because of what happened to Marschall. I was just saying that overall I think Marschall was a more competant commander than Lutjens.

Again, sorry if I offended anyone here

[RF]

Ramius,

I agree with you that Marschall would have been a better choice, as he would have been less introspective than Lutjens and less inclined to give fatalistic speeches to crewmen which inadvertently sinks the morale of the men.

It would be interesting to see what would have happened if Marschall had been Fleet Commander on Operation Berlin.