Bismark after the fateful torpedo

Historical what if discussions, hypothetical operations, battleship vs. battleship engagements, design your own warship, etc.
JustinT
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 4:21 am
Location: Grande Prairie AB,CA

Bismark after the fateful torpedo

Post by JustinT »

I suppose this may be a rather silly question, but it is one ive wondered for a long time - after the torpedo crippled the rudders on Bismark, he could only steam in large circles, which tended to head north toward his stalkers - if Bismarks general heading was north, why could the ship not simply reverse engines? If it were me, and i knew that the british battlegroup was comin at me, yet behind me i had the promise of some protection fro mthe Luftwaffe and the Uboats, I would personally say heck with it, all engines astern.

Where are the flaws in this tactic?
Tiornu
Supporter
Posts: 1222
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:13 am
Location: Ex Utero

Re: Bismark after the fateful torpedo

Post by Tiornu »

Bismarck's problem wasn't that she was heading around in circles. The problem was that she could not steer. That meant her course was determined by the wind and waves, and that was what caused her to head the wrong direction. The direction of the screws--forward or reverse--was irrelevant. She couldn't maintain a steady course, and consequently the elements kept pushing her out to sea.
Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Post by Bgile »

Bismarck did make circles immediately after the torpedo hit. In fact, if she went ahead on all screws she did circle, not moving toward or away from the British in general.

Her captain tried a lot of combinations of ahead and astern on different shafts in an attempt to make progress toward France, but the rudder angle frustrated him. Eventually they settled on a combination which took advantage of the wind and prevailing seas to keep her on a more or less steady course so her gunners could at least shoot back effectively. That course happened to be in the direction of the British.

As an aside, the rudder has more effect when going ahead on the props because their wash is directed against the rudder(s), pushing the stern one way or the other. This is in addition to the normal flow of water past them as a result of the ship moving ahead or astern. One has only to watch a US nuclear submarine attempt to dock without tugs to see what happens when this isn't present. US submarines have their rudders ahead of their screws and their low speed maneuverablity using main screw and rudders is horrible, at least on the surface. They have a small aux propulstion motor they can lower to assist in docking.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Post by RF »

I raised the point of Bismarck going astern in a thread about a year ago and it did provoke considerable discussion. Tiornu made the point that in the rough seas prevailing at the time the Bismarck would always be pushed into a NNW direction.

I also raised the possibility of Lindemann composing a sequence of telegraph orders that would seek to point Bismarck's bow in a SE direction so that the ship could crawl towards safety and Luftwaffe aircover in the Bay of Biscay. This proposition was also rejected on the basis that it was almost impossible to keep the bow pointing in the desired direction because of the angle on the rudder and that it was difficult anyway to steer Bismarck by using the screws alone even with the rudder in midships position. This had already been discovered by the Germans during Bismarck's seagoing trials in the Baltic Sea.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Post Reply