All myths solved

Warship design and construction, terminology, navigation, hydrodynamics, stability, armor schemes, damage control, etc.
User avatar
Terje Langoy
Supporter
Posts: 435
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:15 pm
Location: Bergen, Norway

Post by Terje Langoy »

You are not reading my post entirely, yellowtail. As I pointed out in my previous post the single factor that affected Bismarck most was the external conditions - sea state and wind. The article does not shed too much light on this - could you be so kind and provide an idea as to how the weather was like when Intrepid suffered a jammed rudder...
yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re:

Post by yellowtail3 »

Terje Langoy wrote:You are not reading my post entirely, yellowtail. As I pointed out in my previous post the single factor that affected Bismarck most was the external conditions - sea state and wind. The article does not shed too much light on this - could you be so kind and provide an idea as to how the weather was like when Intrepid suffered a jammed rudder...
'
no, I read the whole thing. I understand the bit about sea state and wind; with an adverse wind, Intrepid had considerable trouble heading home as opposed toward Tokyo. Fact remains, though, that a very similarly damaged Intrepid retained more speed and maneuverability than Bismarck - no flame intended, just a data point.

this board is great... I'm glad to have found it.
Shift Colors... underway.
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: All myths solved

Post by dunmunro »

José M. Rico wrote:The Prinz Eugen was hit on the stern by a 21-inch torpedo from the British submarine Trident off Trondheim on February 1942. The rudder was entirely lost (PG had only one) and the stern collapsed. However the three propellers were not affected and the ship managed to reach Trondheim by her own.
Having the rudder removed entirely, was of course, much to PE's benefit.
yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: All myths solved

Post by yellowtail3 »

dunmunro wrote:Having the rudder removed entirely, was of course, much to PE's benefit.
I think that qualifies as, "The glass is half full!" :lol:
Shift Colors... underway.
User avatar
José M. Rico
Administrator
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:23 am
Location: Madrid, Spain
Contact:

Re: All myths solved

Post by José M. Rico »

yellowtail3 wrote:
dunmunro wrote:Having the rudder removed entirely, was of course, much to PE's benefit.
I think that qualifies as, "The glass is half full!" :lol:
So, you think the Prinz would have done even better had her rudder been jammed 12º to port (like Bismarck) instead of having it blasted out?
yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: All myths solved

Post by yellowtail3 »

José M. Rico wrote:So, you think the Prinz would have done even better had her rudder been jammed 12º to port (like Bismarck) instead of having it blasted out?
no, I agreed with your point. That was an attempt at humor: it's grim when the good news is, "Well, sir, in addition to our fantail being stove in and all our gear knocked out from shock - the rudder's gone, too!"

I suspect the CO was happy to have any good news.At least they weren't sinking... :)
Shift Colors... underway.
User avatar
tommy303
Senior Member
Posts: 1528
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:19 pm
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: All myths solved

Post by tommy303 »

I suspect that the collapsed stern, which did not detach but remained drooping into the water in way of the prop wash, probably acted as a source of increased drag and helped stabilize the ship on course after the loss of the rudder itself. Had the stern not collapsed and acted in such a way, Prinz Eugen might have been as unsteerable as Intrepid after the rudder was removed. Intrepid was largely lucky in both sea state and cumulative degree of rudder deflection.
At the time the torpedo hit the INTREPID was in a left turn using 15° left rudder and at 25 knots. The detonation ruptured the bottom of the steering engine ram room and motor room, immediately flooded these two compartments and jammed the rudder. ..... The net result of this damage insofar as ship control was concerned was to create the permanent effect of approximately 6½° left rudder.
This would indicate, that although the ship was in a 15* port turn, the effect of the damage to the rudder reduced the net effect to 6.5*. It would seem that such was not the case with the Bismarck where one rudder may have been completely destroyed by the torpedo blast and the other jammed hard over at 12* or more. Whatever the case, Bismarck's command was having to try and counter considerably more rudder effect than was the case with Intrepid. Curiously, had the Germans had time and been able to blow the jammed rudders free of the ship, they might have found themselves in as bad or worse state much as was found with Intrepid after the rudder and support stock were removed at Pearl Harbour.

Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
They stood and Earth's foundations stay;
What God abandoned these defended;
And saved the sum of things for pay.
Mostlyharmless
Member
Posts: 211
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:45 pm

Re: All myths solved

Post by Mostlyharmless »

While reading the interesting article (thanks yellowtail3) at http://www.researcheratlarge.com/Ships/ ... ering.html today, I read a list of "Further steps which could have been taken but which proved to be unnecessary during the INTREPID's voyage" including the idea "Tow a small vessel (an escort destroyer or, preferably, a tug) with a short scope astern. This scheme was successfully employed in the Pacific some years ago in the case of a large passenger vessel that was unlucky enough to have lost her rudder, The towed tug, in this case, stopped her engines and used her rudder to steer the heavy vessel which provided the motive power. Speeds as high as 18 knots were maintained."

Now in May 1941, the destroyers Erich Steinbrinck, Friedrich Ihn and Bruno Heinemann were based on the French Atlantic Coast. I do not know exactly where they were on 25th May 1941 or their fuel state (they had escorted Thor to Cherbourg on May 20th). However, as Lütjens had revealed his intention to sail to Brest in the message from Bismarck on 25th May, it might have seemed sensible for the destroyers to be sent to assist, for example as a screen on the night of 26th-27th. So had they arrived just after the Swordfish attack, could the destroyers have saved Bismarck?

Naturally Bismarck's case was much more difficult than the liner mentioned with very bad weather, a jammed rather than a lost rudder, the poor sea keeping of German destroyers and without specialized towing equipment. I suspect that either it would have been impossible to get one of the destroyer's anchor chains aboard Bismarck or that the destroyer could not have acted as a rudder to allow Bismarck to make reasonably rapid progress towards Brest. However, I know very little about ships! Would an expert like to comment.
yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: All myths solved

Post by yellowtail3 »

tommy303 wrote:I suspect that the collapsed stern, which did not detach but remained drooping into the water in way of the prop wash, probably acted as a source of increased drag and helped stabilize the ship on course after the loss of the rudder itself. Had the stern not collapsed and acted in such a way, Prinz Eugen might have been as unsteerable as Intrepid after the rudder was removed.
I think you're probably right.
Shift Colors... underway.
lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3822
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: All myths solved

Post by lwd »

Legend wrote:Troll- One who is overly active online....
I've never heard that definition before. The one I'm more familiar with is deliberate posting of inflammatory messages. Often they'll post a single message disappear which is the exact opposite of the above.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: All myths solved

Post by RF »

Mostlyharmless wrote:
Now in May 1941, the destroyers Erich Steinbrinck, Friedrich Ihn and Bruno Heinemann were based on the French Atlantic Coast. I do not know exactly where they were on 25th May 1941 or their fuel state (they had escorted Thor to Cherbourg on May 20th). However, as Lütjens had revealed his intention to sail to Brest in the message from Bismarck on 25th May, it might have seemed sensible for the destroyers to be sent to assist, for example as a screen on the night of 26th-27th. So had they arrived just after the Swordfish attack, could the destroyers have saved Bismarck?

Naturally Bismarck's case was much more difficult than the liner mentioned with very bad weather, a jammed rather than a lost rudder, the poor sea keeping of German destroyers and without specialized towing equipment. I suspect that either it would have been impossible to get one of the destroyer's anchor chains aboard Bismarck or that the destroyer could not have acted as a rudder to allow Bismarck to make reasonably rapid progress towards Brest. However, I know very little about ships! Would an expert like to comment.
I don't think that three destroyers on their own is enough. Tovey would order Vian, who had Tribals under his command, to deal with these destroyers, five ships on three, plus possible cruiser support from Norfolk, Dorsetshire and Sheffield. Not to mention Force H.
These destroyers would have needed back up from the Luftwaffe and the Twins to bring Bismarck home. And the twins weren't available.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Mostlyharmless
Member
Posts: 211
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:45 pm

Re: All myths solved

Post by Mostlyharmless »

RF wrote:I don't think that three destroyers on their own is enough.
No I am asking if one destroyer could have been enough i.e. Bismarck takes the destroyer in tow, runs her engines for 20 knots and when she wants to turn to port, signals the destroyer to turn its rudder for a turn to starboard, the destroyer angles to starboard, pulls Bismarck's stern to starboard and they all go off to port. This would probably work nicely on a calm day with everything planned in advance and no enemy interference.
yellowtail3
Senior Member
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 5:50 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: All myths solved

Post by yellowtail3 »

Mostlyharmless wrote:This would probably work nicely on a calm day with everything planned in advance and no enemy interference.
...and none of those conditions were met, on 27 May (plus no Germans destroyers around to be shot up by RN destroyers as they tried to hook up towlines to a pitch/rolling crippled battleship in a gale)
Shift Colors... underway.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: All myths solved

Post by RF »

Mostlyharmless,

The maneouvres you mention not only require a calm sea, but no interference from the British, which isn't on. That's why I said three destroyers aren't enough, they would all be quickly sunk, and if a crippled Bismarck tries to cover them with its own fire then Rodney and KGV will shell Bismarck.
The British forces are simply too great.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: All myths solved

Post by Bgile »

I really do find the whole idea of using another ship as a sea anchor to be intriging. I think the greatest problem would be getting the line passed between the ships and then keeping it from parting or pulling out whatever it was anchored to. Also, I'm afraid that even if you managed to pass a line and it stayed put the whipping about in the heavy seas would make it impossible to keep Bismarck pointed in a desired direction.

A really interesting idea, though.
Post Reply