Less seriously torpedo damaged Bismarck

[dunmunro]

"Due to the acute fuel situation in both KGV and Rodney, diplomatic sources had sought and obtained approval from the Government of Eire for both battleships to refuel in southern Irish port. However, it was calculated aboard the flagship, that just enough oil remained for both ships to reach Loch Ewe (Scotland) at a speed of 19 knots." KGV Class BBs, Tarrent, p80.

I had to wrack my brains to figure out where I had read this!

[dunmunro]

Even if the Irish allow British BB to be refueled from tankers operating out of Irish ports, that would take the better part of a day in which the BB is cruising along at very slow speed. The British Replenishment at sea was just not that good.

My understanding is that the BB would be refuelled from the tanker while in a Southern Irish port.

[Paul L]

...With regards LW airpower I would work from the assumption that rather than mount cap, they would go on the offensive just like around Crete at the very same time that Bismarck is being sunk.Attacking RN warships & battleships etc from 400km away. If they could do this off Crete, they could do the same off France.

Isn't this pretty much what they did historically. I believe they sank at least one British DD returning to port after Bismarck sunk. However they aren't going to be intercepting swordfish attacking Bismarck if they aren't flying cap over it.

Well in the Crete action battleships and Cruisers were attacked and damaged . This too could happen and drive off the RN assets allowing Bismarck to limp into port.

[Paul L]

Isn't this pretty much what they did historically. I believe they sank at least one British DD returning to port after Bismarck sunk. However they aren't going to be intercepting swordfish attacking Bismarck if they aren't flying cap over it.

Well in the Crete action battleships and Cruisers were attacked and damaged . This too could happen and drive off the RN assets allowing Bismarck to limp into port.

Updated info since I can't edit my previous post.

I also note that during the Crete air attacks in may 1941, the RN Carrier HMS Illustrious was damaged by German 1000kg bombs and out of action for 6 months.
http://uboat.net/allies/warships/ship/3232.html

Another source reports 7 x 500kg and 1 x 250kg bombs hit HMS Illustrious during these attacks
http://www.navypedia.org/ships/uk/brit_ ... trious.htm

Illustrious was badly damaged by direct hits of seven 500kg and 1 250kg German air bombs and one near-miss 10/1/1941. She has received new bomb hits 16/1/1941 during damage repair on Malta. Illustrious has left out of operation for a year.

During that time she had 36 Fullmar and Swordfish aircraft. The HMS Arc Royal at the same time had 54 Fullmar and Swordfish aircraft

http://www.navypedia.org/ships/uk/brit_cv_ark_royal.htm

During these attacks a number of RN battleships and crusiers were damaged and several Cruisers and destroyer sunk by airpower at some distance from their bases [~ 400km]

[dunmunro]

IIRC, the Luftwaffe attacks against Illustrious all occurred at ranges of ~160km from their bases. The exact position was 35D 59'n, 13D 13'E and using Google Earth the likely distance was less than 100nm, for certain. Mashona, OTOH, was sunk about 370nm from Brest.

[Bgile]

Was Illustrious equipped with the RN armored deck in addition to the presumably very effective Fulmar CAP? I've seen posters argue that most bombs aren't very effective against these ships.

[dunmunro]

In January 1941 the Fulmar was the best CAP aircraft available. It had lower performance than contemporary land based fighters but more firepower. The Fulmars had been drawn down low and some distance from Illustrious to intercept a TB strike when the Stukas appeared. The Stuka's range and performance with a 500kg AP bomb was severely restricted, as was its maximum altitude, so had the Fulmars been in position they could probably have broken up the attack. The decision to send Illustrious so close to Luftwaffe bases allowed the Stukas to attack but also diverted the attack away from the Convoy.

Yes, Illustrious had an armoured hanger, and the armour forced the use of low yield AP bombs, which the Stuka dropped too low to ensure effective penetration into Illustrious's machinery spaces. the FD armour could not stop such heavy bombs but the armour reduced casualties and ensured that she retained her mobility.

[Paul L]

From what I've read about Fulmars , they were no match for land based fighters with top speeds of only 275mph.

While the Stuka might be vulnerable they would be escorted by Me-109s which had the range with econofuel comsumption and drop tanks. Also wasn't the Ju-88 available as effective slant bombers with high hits in trained squadrons? It was used in this role in the Channel, a year before.

[dunmunro]

The Fulmar faced off against land based fighters on a number of occasions and generally acquitted itself fairly well. It was highly optimized for low altitude performance so the gap between it and other fighters was not as wide as its top speed would suggest but it was still not meant to oppose single engine fighters. AFAIK, there were no Me109 fighters present on Jan 10 1941.

It was probably Ju-88 bombers that sank Mashona. The Fulmar would have had a tough time downing a Ju-88 at altitude, but at low altitude it probably had a somewhat of a speed advantage over a loaded bomber.

[RF]

"Due to the acute fuel situation in both KGV and Rodney, diplomatic sources had sought and obtained approval from the Government of Eire for both battleships to refuel in southern Irish port. However, it was calculated aboard the flagship, that just enough oil remained for both ships to reach Loch Ewe (Scotland) at a speed of 19 knots." KGV Class BBs, Tarrent, p80.

I had to wrack my brains to figure out where I had read this!

Where did Tarrent get this info? Churchill had expected that KGV might have to be towed home - an absolute last resort as far as Tovey was concerned, neither seem to be aware of the activities ''of diplomatic sources obtaining Eire approval of refuelling KGV in a Southern Irish port.''

[dunmunro]

"Due to the acute fuel situation in both KGV and Rodney, diplomatic sources had sought and obtained approval from the Government of Eire for both battleships to refuel in southern Irish port. However, it was calculated aboard the flagship, that just enough oil remained for both ships to reach Loch Ewe (Scotland) at a speed of 19 knots." KGV Class BBs, Tarrent, p80.

I had to wrack my brains to figure out where I had read this!

Where did Tarrent get this info? Churchill had expected that KGV might have to be towed home - an absolute last resort as far as Tovey was concerned, neither seem to be aware of the activities ''of diplomatic sources obtaining Eire approval of refuelling KGV in a Southern Irish port.''

Tarrent doesn't give a source. Apparently after Churchill pushed the Admiralty into sending the infamous towing signal, diplomatic efforts were made to secure the use of an Irish port, according to Tarrent. I know that on several occasions that RN ships sought refuge from the weather in Irish ports. I'm not that familiar with neutrality laws but it seems International law provides for harbour privileges to ships in distress. In any event if KGV did decide to visit an Irish port, there's not a lot Ireland could have done about it, just as Uruguay really couldn't refuse Langsdorf.

[Patrick McWilliams]

"Due to the acute fuel situation in both KGV and Rodney, diplomatic sources had sought and obtained approval from the Government of Eire for both battleships to refuel in southern Irish port. However, it was calculated aboard the flagship, that just enough oil remained for both ships to reach Loch Ewe (Scotland) at a speed of 19 knots." KGV Class BBs, Tarrent, p80.

I had to wrack my brains to figure out where I had read this!

Where did Tarrent get this info? Churchill had expected that KGV might have to be towed home - an absolute last resort as far as Tovey was concerned, neither seem to be aware of the activities ''of diplomatic sources obtaining Eire approval of refuelling KGV in a Southern Irish port.''

Tarrent doesn't give a source. Apparently after Churchill pushed the Admiralty into sending the infamous towing signal, diplomatic efforts were made to secure the use of an Irish port, according to Tarrent. I know that on several occasions that RN ships sought refuge from the weather in Irish ports. I'm not that familiar with neutrality laws but it seems International law provides for harbour privileges to ships in distress. In any event if KGV did decide to visit an Irish port, there's not a lot Ireland could have done about it, just as Uruguay really couldn't refuse Langsdorf.

Without a source for that extraordinary claim, it cannot be taken seriously and I doubt it's true. It's one thing for Churchill and De Valera (Irish Taoiseach) to agree to a secret corridor across the north-west of Ireland for British/Allied planes to reach the Atlantic much more quickly, as it was unlikely to be discovered, but quite another for a British warship to be refuelled in an Irish port and then be given permission to leave again with all the attendant publicity and German indignation.

[Bgile]

The Fulmar faced off against land based fighters on a number of occasions and generally acquitted itself fairly well. It was highly optimized for low altitude performance so the gap between it and other fighters was not as wide as its top speed would suggest but it was still not meant to oppose single engine fighters. AFAIK, there were no Me109 fighters present on Jan 10 1941.

It was probably Ju-88 bombers that sank Mashona. The Fulmar would have had a tough time downing a Ju-88 at altitude, but at low altitude it probably had a somewhat of a speed advantage over a loaded bomber.

It wouldn't be fighting a loaded bomber at low altitude. The bomber would probably dive from high altitude, drop it's bombs, and run out at maximum unloaded speed. Also, the armament of eight rifle caliber machine guns was considered insufficient armament against modern aircraft and was highly criticized in the hurricane and spitfire and improved upon as soon as practical to do so. In the case of the Hurricane that was in June of 1941, when they began to be armed with four 20mm cannon. Until then the original armament was used successfully, but certainly wasn't considered to be a heavy armament for a fighter. It would help to have lots of ammunition because you could sit there and shoot until the target accumulated enough damage to go down, while the Hurricane and Spitfire sometimes ran out of ammo before that happened. The of course the gunners in the bomber are trying to do the same to you ...

I'm sure a Stuka would be a much easier target because they are so slow.

[tommy303]

The Ju-88, once it had dropped its ordnance, had an almost identical top speed as the Fulmar--the latter having only a 3mph advantage. Additionally, the Ju-88 had a climb rate which bettered the Fulmar by 400ft per minute, so it would have been a tough opponent to nail down compared to the slower, more pedestrian Italian bombers against which the Fulmar enjoyed success.

[dunmunro]

Without a source for that extraordinary claim, it cannot be taken seriously and I doubt it's true. It's one thing for Churchill and De Valera (Irish Taoiseach) to agree to a secret corridor across the north-west of Ireland for British/Allied planes to reach the Atlantic much more quickly, as it was unlikely to be discovered, but quite another for a British warship to be refuelled in an Irish port and then be given permission to leave again with all the attendant publicity and German indignation.

Why would this be any different from Graf Spee seeking temporary shelter in a neutral port? The KM set the precedent after all. Ireland had no means to compel KGV to stay,