"Naval History" Magazine, December 2017
Moderator: Bill Jurens
- Patrick McWilliams
- Member
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:17 pm
"Naval History" Magazine, December 2017
Season's Greetings everyone :)
I see that Robert J. "Bob" Winklareth, a former prolific contributor to this site, has an article entitled "The Not-So-Mighty Bismarck" in the above publication.
Has anyone else seen it and what do people think of his thesis that "The German battleship Bismarck mounted
eight 15-inch guns, but the relatively light weight of her armor-piercing projectiles meant that contemporaneous battleships outgunned her".
All the best,
Paddy
I see that Robert J. "Bob" Winklareth, a former prolific contributor to this site, has an article entitled "The Not-So-Mighty Bismarck" in the above publication.
Has anyone else seen it and what do people think of his thesis that "The German battleship Bismarck mounted
eight 15-inch guns, but the relatively light weight of her armor-piercing projectiles meant that contemporaneous battleships outgunned her".
All the best,
Paddy
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm
Re: "Naval History" Magazine, December 2017
You might post this at forum.axis.history.com. I would search the forums for an existing thread.
- frontkampfer
- Member
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 2:35 am
- Location: Phillipsburg, NJ - USA
Re: "Naval History" Magazine, December 2017
I'm a USNI member and I have read the article and the author's book. I am not impressed by either.
"I will not have my ship shot out from under my ass!"
- Patrick McWilliams
- Member
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 2:17 pm
Re: "Naval History" Magazine, December 2017
Fair enough, but KBismarck.com is (one of?) the premier sites for Bismarck and I've been a member here for years - even if I've been quiet in recent times [/OpanaPointer wrote:You might post this at forum.axis.history.com. I would search the forums for an existing thread.
- Rick Rather
- Member
- Posts: 141
- Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 4:15 am
- Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Re: "Naval History" Magazine, December 2017
100% of the contemporaneous battleships that were hit by Bismarck's 15" shells would disagree with Winklareth's thesis.Patrick McWilliams wrote:...what do people think of his thesis that "The German battleship Bismarck mounted
eight 15-inch guns, but the relatively light weight of her armor-piercing projectiles meant that contemporaneous battleships outgunned her".
Welcome back and Happy New Year!
Just because it's stupid, futile and doomed to failure, that doesn't mean some officer won't try it.
-- R. Rather
-- R. Rather
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm
Re: "Naval History" Magazine, December 2017
True, but Axis History gets a wee bit more traffic. I've been here for years, I like what I read here, for the most part. I'm always chary of single sourced information.Patrick McWilliams wrote:Fair enough, but KBismarck.com is (one of?) the premier sites for Bismarck and I've been a member here for years - even if I've been quiet in recent times [/OpanaPointer wrote:You might post this at forum.axis.history.com. I would search the forums for an existing thread.
- Dave Saxton
- Supporter
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
- Location: Rocky Mountains USA
Re: "Naval History" Magazine, December 2017
This statement by Winklareth is based on the faulty assumption that the important metric of an armour piercing shell's potency is its weight. It is related to the common assumption that weight of broadside is a good indicator of firepower. What other things about Bismarck did he express assumptions about?Patrick McWilliams wrote:Season's Greetings everyone :)
I see that Robert J. "Bob" Winklareth, a former prolific contributor to this site, has an article entitled "The Not-So-Mighty Bismarck" in the above publication.
Has anyone else seen it and what do people think of his thesis that "The German battleship Bismarck mounted
eight 15-inch guns, but the relatively light weight of her armor-piercing projectiles meant that contemporaneous battleships outgunned her".
All the best,
Paddy
Entering a night sea battle is an awesome business.The enveloping darkness, hiding the enemy's.. seems a living thing, malignant and oppressive.Swishing water at the bow and stern mark an inexorable advance toward an unknown destiny.
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 1:00 pm
Re: "Naval History" Magazine, December 2017
Speaking of that issue, was anyone else ... disturbed by the Imperial chrysanthemum on a certain warship drawing?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:21 am
- Location: USA
Re: "Naval History" Magazine, December 2017
Mr. Winklareth is the author of a variety of rather bizarre and off-the-wall 'theories', of which this is just the latest. I'm surprised (and somewhat disappointed) that Naval History even printed this article. This sort of editorial blunder is one reason I stopped subscribing to Naval History five or ten years ago.
Bill Jurens
Bill Jurens
- frontkampfer
- Member
- Posts: 249
- Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 2:35 am
- Location: Phillipsburg, NJ - USA
Re: "Naval History" Magazine, December 2017
Bill,
Thank you for your post. As far as I am concerned it says all there needs to be said about this author.
Thank you for your post. As far as I am concerned it says all there needs to be said about this author.
"I will not have my ship shot out from under my ass!"