Speed increase on Bismarck

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
miro777
Member
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:13 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Speed increase on Bismarck

Post by miro777 »

hey
it's a pretty easy question?
i just can't calculate it.
if the Bismarck let's say could go topspeed at 32 kn
would that have ensured a save journey to france, with all the other incidents (hits from PoW, hits from Victorious, etc.) until the point of the one Faithful hit from Ark Royal, would that have changed anything???

adios
miro
Die See ruft....
User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3148
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Post by Dave Saxton »

Because of the need to conserve fuel, Bismarck cruised at lower speeds toward France. IIRC, about 22 knots. Had it been able to cruise at higher speeds, say 25, or 27 knots it would have been well within the Luftwaffe protection range, before Force H could have attacked it. Bismarck still had plently enough top speed, with a self impossed limit of 28 knots, but because of the fuel loss it could not maintain high cruising speeds for long periods.
Robert J. Winklareth
-
Posts: 116
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 5:58 pm
Location: Woodbridge, VA USA
Contact:

Post by Robert J. Winklareth »

Hi Miro,

Dave is correct in his analysis, but I often wondered if it would not have been better for the Bismarck to steam at full speed to come under Luftwaffe protection as soon as possible and then request a tanker to be sent out to refuel her for the last stretch to Brest.

There was never any sound explanation given for Admiral Lutjens' decision not to top off in Grimstad Fjord, so that failure must go down as one of the greatest blunders in naval history.

Bob
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Post by RF »

Robert J. Winklareth wrote:Hi Miro,

Dave is correct in his analysis, but I often wondered if it would not have been better for the Bismarck to steam at full speed to come under Luftwaffe protection as soon as possible and then request a tanker to be sent out to refuel her for the last stretch to Brest.



Bob
Refuelling from a tanker in Biscay would leave Bismarck(and the tanker) dangerously exposed - both ships stopped, sitting targets for sub and air attack. Remember that British attacks would be pretty desparate and determined by then, regardless of cost.
User avatar
miro777
Member
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:13 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Post by miro777 »

hey bob...
i must say, i also asked myself the same question...
but as RF pointed out correctly...refueling in the Biscay is not the best thing you should do...

wat about the idea of building up a whole protection center...
several destroyers against torpedoes...
tugs, to carry BS to France and non-stop aircover, with bombers ready to start any minute??

adios
miro
Die See ruft....
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Post by RF »

miro777 wrote:hey bob...
i must say, i also asked myself the same question...
but as RF pointed out correctly...refueling in the Biscay is not the best thing you should do...

wat about the idea of building up a whole protection center...
several destroyers against torpedoes...
tugs, to carry BS to France and non-stop aircover, with bombers ready to start any minute??

adios
miro
This is what should have been done.

Something like this was later done to escort the blockade runners in/out of Biscay.
User avatar
miro777
Member
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:13 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Post by miro777 »

ha!

exactly...my point!


adios
Die See ruft....
Post Reply