Moderator: Bill Jurens
Source pls ?Alberto Virtuani wrote: 1) Pow was better protected than BS (at least on paper) and she could sustain some heavy hits from BS
Last hit on Bismarck scored at 5:59. No hits were obtained after Bismarck shifted fire to Prince of Wales.2) PoW was scoring hits on BS (and McMullen was aware of this fact)
Just looking armour thickness data (belt (15 vs 13 inch abreast magazines) and decks (7 inch vs 6 inch over magazines), please see British Admiralty comparison diagram below, saving and enlarging image as it's not a very good version). Especially PoW belt was far more extended below waterline than BS one. I'm afraid this is not the right thread to fully analyse these battleships protection. A discussion should also take into account many other parameters (steel quality, general armour layout, beam, distance between bulkheads, number of protected decks, shell rooms and magazines respective positions, etc.) That's why I said PoW was better protected just on paper..... From any source KGV class battleships were anyway considered among the best protected battleships ever.Alecsandros wrote:
Source pls ?
At 5:59 BS had put just one hit on Hood (the second fatal one just at 6:00), while PoW had scored 3 hits on BS. Therefore PoW was firing quite well. Of course at 6:00 the turn to avoid Hood wreck and the counter-turn to port were affecting her gunnery direction. However I can imagine that, resuming the previously ordered course at 6:02 instead of continuing the turn to disengage, would have allowed McMullen to adjust fire and to hit BS again. This was McMullen opinion as well.Alecsandros wrote:
Last hit on Bismarck scored at 5:59. No hits were obtained after Bismarck shifted fire to Prince of Wales.
Capt. Philpotts did not withdraw his ship from the action, Warspite was just unable to keep her position and she was left alone while turning a couple of circles due to her jammed steering. Philpotts tried to re-join action as soon as the steering problem was bypassed. However the speed of Warspite was too low, the distance from the battlefleet was too much and the order of withdrawal came from the Admiral of the 5th Battle Squadron, who decided not to put at risk the battered Warspite.Byron Angel wrote:
Philpotts did not signal S.O. 5BS until perhaps 2.5 hours later, long after he had already withdrawn his ship from the action.
and, as far as I know, it was not ordered by anybody. The drawing and the interpetation are incorrect.Alberto Virtuani wrote:
Just looking armour thickness data (belt (15 vs 13 inch abreast
At 5:59 BS had put jt onhit on Hood (the second fatal one Of course at 6:00 the turn to avoid Hood wreck and the counter-turn to port were affecting ming the previously ordered course at 6:02 instead of continuing the turn to disengage, would have allowed McMullen to adjust fire and to hit BS again. This was McMullen opinion as well.Alecsandros wrote:
Last hit on Bismarck scored at 5:59. No hits were obtained after Bismarck shifted fire to Prince of Wales.
Sorry, but as I stated this is not the right thread to discuss protection. Just one example however: horizontal protection in KGV was even composed of 1 inch wheather deck, + 6 inch armoured deck + 1,5 inch splinter protection over magazines for a total of 8,5 inch, more than BS. In addition shell room was over magazines adding additional protection against plunging fire. Again a comparison, while very interesting, is far beyond the topic of this thread. In general PoW protection was following "all or nothing" concept while BS was not.Alecsandros wrote:
The drawing and the interpetation are incorrect.
I totally agree with you , after the turn to starboard and the counter turn to port, she would have been in an excellent position/course to fire IF the turn to port was not continued (until a complete disengagement) making difficult for the fire director to have his turrets bearing and to hit BS again.Alecsandros wrote:
Pow made a 20* course alteration to avoid hood. Immediately after that she was in excellent position to fire, and very close to bismarck. Howevwr, no morr straddles were obtained at all.
Incorrect again,Alberto Virtuani wrote: Sorry, but as I stated this is not the right thread to discuss protection. Just one example however: horizontal protection in KGV was even composed of 1 inch wheather deck, + 6 inch armoured deck + 1,5 inch splinter protection over magazines for a total of 8,5 inch, more than BS.
No,Alecsandros wrote:
I totally agree with you , after the turn to starboard and the counter turn to port, she would have been in an excellent position/course to fire IF the turn to port was not continued (until a complete disengagement) making difficult for the fire director to have his turrets bearing and to hit BS again.
KGV's weather deck was composed of 'D' steel:alecsandros wrote:
Incorrect again,
there was no armor grade material in KGV weather deck. And the "splinter protection" you are refering to was also Ducol steel, not armor grade material.
[by comparison, Bismarck's belt plates and decks were laid on 25mm St52 construction steel - but this is not taken into consideration when discussing armor, as it was simply not built to withstand APC hits]
and it had excellent armour qualities.RELATIVE AVERAGE ARMOR QUALITY OF TYPICAL IRON-BASED ARMORS AND STEELS
Ballistic Quality
Homogeneous Metal Type
POST-WWI Homogeneous Krupp-Type Armor (Except Japanese NVNC & 1.00
CNC)*
Homogeneous Krupp-Type Armor Through WWI & Japanese NVNC & CNC 0.95
British-Type 'DUCOL' ("D" OR "D.1") Improved High-Tensile 0.9
Steel
Homogeneous Cast Krupp-Type Armor (Special Fittings) 0.9
Homogeneous 'Nickel' Steel Armor from 1895 Through WWI 0.85
Post-WWI High-Tensile Construction Steel ("HT" OR "HTS") 0.85
High-Tensile Construction Steel Through WWI 0.8
Post-WWI 'Mild' OR 'Medium' Construction Steel 0.78
Homogeneous Nickel Steel Armor From 1899 To 1895 0.75
Mild or Medium Construction Steel from 1895 Through WWI 0.73
Mild or Medium Construction Steel and Armor up to 1895 0.7
Wrought Iron (Construction and Armor) (Solid Plates) 0.6
Cast Iron (Not Chilled or Otherwise Specially Treated) 0.4
Multiply actual plate thickness to get effective U.S. WWII STS replacement thickness with roughly the same Navy Ballistic Limit.
http://www.combinedfleet.com/okun_biz.htm
We have already established that PoW was under fire by PE prior to hitting Bismarck at 5:59:40. The excerpts from Brooke and others show that PoW was making radical manoeuvres from 0600, when Hood exploded, which reduced her gunnery effectiveness and she was under full helm from 0601:No,
Prince of Wales scored at 5:59, immediately after which she was taken under fire by Bismarck's 15cm turrets, Prinz Eugen's 20.3cm and 10.5cm turrets and, at 6:01, by Bismarck's 38cm gun turrets.
It is important to see that there were no more straddles obtained by Prince of Wales between 5:59 - 6:01, allthough the range was very good, and the turn hadn't been initiated yet.
Then she made a 20* turn, which was an absolutely casual turn ! No ship loses her fire control solution after 20* turns ! However, she still hadn't obtained any hits.
After that, at 6:03, when the turn was completed, she started to disengage, and the 2 German ships also manovred hard to escape torpedoes.
So all ships made ample manouvreing - however, Prince of Wales failed to score any more straddles/hits, while she received 7 hits from the German ships.
It seems you can't escape any possibility of making a fool of yourself ?dunmunro wrote:
KGV's weather deck was composed of 'D' steel:
No, that is a claim you have yet to present sources for.We have already established that PoW was under fire by PE prior to hitting Bismarck at 5:59:40.
What radical manouvres and why ?The excerpts from Brooke and others show that PoW was making radical manoeuvres from 0600
What imune zone calculated by WHO ???As has already been stated PoW was exiting her immune zone (as calculated by the RN)
Oh really, not anyone? Look again at this armour diagram:alecsandros wrote:
It seems you can't escape any possibility of making a fool of yourself ?
British homogenous armor of the time was called "rolled homogenous armor " (RHA), and had indeed excellent armor properties.
British D steel, was British construction steel of the period, similar to the German St52.
Of course D steel is not included in total armor , by anyone.
We have already established that PoW was under fire by PE prior to hitting Bismarck at 5:59:40.
I have already pointed this out to you:No, that is a claim you have yet to present sources for.
Prinz Eugen first salvos landed around Prince of Wales also at around 5:59, and substracting the time of flight for the 14" shells, it's probable that no more salvos were fired which straddled Bismarck. Regardless, PE was a heavy cruiser, so it shoudnl't matter to much to anybody. But what matters is that immediately after Bismarck shifted fire to her, Prince of Wales fire became erratic, and could not find target at all.
The excerpts from Brooke and others show that PoW was making radical manoeuvres from 0600
a 20 degree turn and back again under full helm:What radical manouvres and why ?
On the maps the course correction was 20*
As has already been stated PoW was exiting her immune zone (as calculated by the RN)
[/quote]What imune zone calculated by WHO ???
The Royal Navy believed Bismarck's guns fired with a muzzle velocity of 830-920 m/s , and you're talking about imunity zone at 13km ???
If Leech was so concerned about the imunity zone, why did he allowed to close the range down to 13km ?
Duncan, get a grip, would you ?dunmunro wrote:
Oh really, not anyone? Look again at this armour diagram:
You don't understand.the salvo that scored the last hit on Bismarck was fired at 0559:40:
http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... encIVa.gif
Sorry, but that piece comes from 6:03, when the ship turned away from battle. (this is when turret Y jammed...)The excerpts from Brooke and others show that PoW was making radical manoeuvres from 0600
...I've already given you the source for this information, but here it is again:
The KGV armour scheme is not wrong and since when are you such an authority on this that you can challenge RN documents? The RN clearly identifies D steel as armour, as does Okun.alecsandros wrote:
Duncan, get a grip, would you ?
That armor scheme is wrong, as I have written above - and you know it also all to well
the salvo that scored the last hit on Bismarck was fired at 0559:40:
http://www.hmshood.org.uk/reference/off ... encIVa.gif
I understand perfectly. PoW was under helm from 0600 onward ( as Antonio's drawing shows) and this, along with Bismarck's own turn away, disrupted her gunnery.You don't understand.
The essence is that Prince of Wales could not straddle or hit anything immediately after being taken under fire by Bismarck.
PoW fired 5 more salvos between 6:01 - 6:05, none of which straddled.
The excerpts from Brooke and others show that PoW was making radical manoeuvres from 0600
Sorry, but that piece comes from 6:03, when the ship turned away from battle. (this is when turret Y jammed...)
Another salvo had just gone when I heard Guns warn his director layer 'Stand by to alter course to port'. This long-awaited move— presumably we were going back to the original heading so that 'Y' turret could bear for the first time—had begun to take place, in that we heeled to starboard and it became temporarily more difficult to hold the Bismarck steady in one's glasses, when the ship suddenly rolled upright again and then continued to heel over the opposite way; moreover, with the urgency and excessive vibration that comes only from violent rudder movement. We were going hard-a-starboard. Back towards the enemy again. What the hell was going on? There was a momentary lull. Probably the director gunner had been put off his aim, and in the comparative quiet I realised that hitherto there had been an intermittent background noise. The ship steadied up and there began to come back to port. Dick Beckworth said "my god! The Hood's gone!...
Brooke, p.55-56.
...I've already given you the source for this information, but here it is again:
This is from ADM 116/4351:The Royal Navy received reports about Bismarck's guns firing in excess of 824m/s.
It is absolutely ridiculous to assume Leech was using WW1-era gun performances for Bismarck...
This is from ADM 239-268:APPENDIX TO ENCLOSURE III.
CONSTRUCTIONAL.
The principal lesson of the loss of H.M.S. "HOOD" is that the magazines of a warship should be so situated and protected that, so far as can be foreseen, it is impossible for a shell or splinters of a shell to penetrate such a vital compartment. This is not a new lesson. It was learned during the last war and applied to the two capital ships designed after that war, the magazines being placed below the shell room and below very heavy deck armour of a new type developed for the purpose.
2. Since that date the necessity for such a change in design has been emphasized by the results of a long service of magazine trials and the development of aircraft carrying heavy bombs.
3. This lesson was applied as far as practicable when the older capital ships were reconstructed. It was intended to reconstruct "HOOD" in this way after "QUEEN ELIZABETH" was completed, but the outbreak of war prevented this. Except for "ROYAL OAK", nothing was done to the "ROYAL SOVEREIGN" class, as these ships were to be scrapped when the ships of the "KING GEORGE V" Class were completed. It was not possible in these old ships to place the magazine below the shell room.
4. The present situation in regard to the capacity of existing capital ships to withstand German 15" shell reaching the magazines is as follows:-4. The present situation in regard to the capacity of existing capital ships to withstand German 15" shell reaching the magazines is as follows:-
(a) Side Protection: Main Belt
At 90°
Inclination
"KING GEORGE V" Class Immune outside about 15,000 yards.
"NELSON" and "RODNEY"
"QUEEN ELIZABETH" Class Immune outside about 18,000 yards.
"ROYAL SOVEREIGN" Class
"RENOWN" Can be defeated at all ranges up to 28,000 yards
BRITISH CAPITAL SHIPS—APPROXIMATE IMMUNITY RANGES TO CHANCE VITAL HITS IN MAGAZINES AND SPEED HITS IN MACHINERY SPACES FROM FOREIGN CAPITAL SHIPS' GUNFIRE
90° Inclination
15"
(Germany, Italy, France)
King George V (5)
CVH:
13-31 (thousands of yds)
Speed:
15-27 (thousands of yds).
As far as the MAD itself goes that's pretty much correct, but KGV's magazines are still located 3 decks further down with a 1.5in layer of armour directly above them. Penetrating TP's MAD over the magazine = penetration of the magazine; which is not the case for KGV.Dave Saxton wrote:The horizontal protection of KGV and TP are equal in terms of effective thickness:
6" over the magazines.
5" over the machinery.
