PDA

View Full Version : Bismarck/Tirpitz



aly j
10-02-2008, 12:35 AM
Did the allies had an answer to these to ships?

ptimms
10-02-2008, 02:37 AM
Well they sank both so I suppose the answer is yes. Both were killed by air power ( one directly and one indirectly) and Germany's inability to produce an operational Carrier was the problem.

aly j
10-02-2008, 09:34 AM
Well they sank both so I suppose the answer is yes. Both were killed by air power ( one directly and one indirectly) and Germany's inability to produce an operational Carrier was the problem.

Is this fact-Bismarck was damage by an ww1 British fighter.The plane was too slow for the Bismarck mordern fast powerful guns, got through there deffence and manage to hit Bismarcks rudder, and the Bismarck was a sitting duck- maybe it was a fluke that it was distroyed Bismarck.
But i dont know nothing about Tirpitz.

Adrian Wainer
10-02-2008, 09:53 AM
Is this fact-Bismarck was damage by an ww1 British fighter.The plane was too slow for the Bismarck mordern fast powerful guns, got through there deffence and manage to hit Bismarcks rudder, and the Bismarck was a sitting duck- maybe it was a fluke that it was distroyed Bismarck.
But i dont know nothing about Tirpitz.

The Swordfish was a dedicated naval attack/recon aircraft not a fighter, yes it was slow and this made it vulnerable to enemy triple A but the Fleet Air Arm was created with very limited objectives and it was the lack of surface ships after Hitler had over-run much of Europe and the French Fleet was lost to the Allied cause which forced it in to a much more prominent role.

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

Nickdfresh
10-02-2008, 10:15 AM
Didn't the German Kreigsmarine lack smaller caliber, close in air defense weapons on those capital ships?

pdf27
10-02-2008, 10:23 AM
It's also worth pointing out that Bismarck may have been mobility-killed by a Swordfish, but it was sunk by King George V and Rodney in short order - and neither suffered significant damage in the process. Both ships did more damage to themselves than Bismarck did to them - Rodney due to blast from it's own guns, King George V due to problems with the shell handling mechanism breaking down.

flamethrowerguy
10-02-2008, 11:01 AM
Didn't the German Kreigsmarine lack smaller caliber, close in air defense weapons on those capital ships?

One would think two 2cm-quadruplets, 12 single 2cm-guns, 8 3,7cm-twins, 8 10,5cm-twins of the Bismarck should have been enough as air protection...

pdf27
10-02-2008, 01:30 PM
Hardly - compare it to the numbers for an Iowa class, which was still insufficient to totally protect against Kamikazes, and then remember that the US battleship had vastly superior fire-control systems along with proximity fused 5" shells.

20 5-inch/38 caliber DP Guns (Mark 12) (127mm)
80 40mm/56 Anti-Aircraft
49 20mm/70 Anti-Aircraft

The comparable numbers for Bismarck are

16 Twin DP guns (105mm)
16 37mm Anti-Aircraft
20 20mm Anti-Aircraft

flamethrowerguy
10-02-2008, 04:26 PM
Hardly - compare it to the numbers for an Iowa class, which was still insufficient to totally protect against Kamikazes, and then remember that the US battleship had vastly superior fire-control systems along with proximity fused 5" shells.

20 5-inch/38 caliber DP Guns (Mark 12) (127mm)
80 40mm/56 Anti-Aircraft
49 20mm/70 Anti-Aircraft

The comparable numbers for Bismarck are

16 Twin DP guns (105mm)
16 37mm Anti-Aircraft
20 20mm Anti-Aircraft

Convinced. Sounded sufficient though on the first read, especially against 15 Swordfish, hardly going beyond the 200km/h IIRC, during that crucial attack.

ptimms
10-02-2008, 04:57 PM
Flame,

I had also read this about the KM's lack of AA, especially as most Battleships of this era could use their secondary guns as AA, I don't think Bismark could. Compare this with Prince of Wales 16x 5.25, 48 x 2pdr, 1 x 40mm (?) and 8 x 20mm. (didn't help her) Later it was to increase massively, USS New Jersey had 80 x 40mm and 49 x 20mm. But the best protection was fighters from a carrier.

PDF,

Agreed but it was a significant mobility loss, at only 7 or 8 knots and her fire affected by the list, she was a sitting duck. It only took 30 minutes to put all her guns out of action.

pdf27
10-02-2008, 06:11 PM
Agreed but it was a significant mobility loss, at only 7 or 8 knots and her fire affected by the list, she was a sitting duck. It only took 30 minutes to put all her guns out of action.
Agreed that Bismarck was at a very significant disadvantage, but nonetheless if it was equally as good as either of the attacking ships it should at least have done some damage to them. It would have been a less stable gun platform, and had slightly less chance of dodging incoming salvos, but the relative movement between the two is identical and the Bismarck's main armament was initially undamaged. Instead it did virtually no damage and was reduced to a burning wreck in minutes.

Walther
10-02-2008, 08:00 PM
First, the Swordfish was NOT a WW1 aircraft, it was designed in the early 1930s. As a torpedo bomber, it had to be able to fly slow. Drop a torpedo too fast or from too high, it will break apart (torpedoes are very sensitive machines).
The frame and fabric design had another advantage: Similar to the Hurricane, the aircraft could take a huge amount of punishment and could be repaired quite fast.
Low take off and landing speeds also make good carrier aircraft, where the length of the "runway"" is limited.

Jan

gunner-B
10-03-2008, 08:25 PM
The Swordfish was responsible for sinking more enemy ships than any other allied aircraft of WW2. Obsolete she may have been, deadly she most certainly was....

SS Ouche-Vittes
10-04-2008, 09:41 PM
i think you're wrong gunner, i read in a book that the Aichi Val is responsible for sinking the most ships during ww2.

Churchill
10-04-2008, 10:01 PM
I heard the same thing SS, though, it is kind of similar to the Dauntless(I think) in design ways.

SS Ouche-Vittes
10-04-2008, 10:15 PM
the aichi had eliptical wings and the dauntless didn't. the dauntless was armored and the aichi wasn't. The aichi could dogfight cause it was light. they both had radials and catapults though.

Churchill
10-04-2008, 10:38 PM
The Aichi is the Japanese equivalent of the Dauntless in the BF1942 demo. I was wondering if there was any correlation.

gunner-B
10-05-2008, 04:28 PM
SS Ouche-Vittes

Please read my thread again and you will see that I mention the word ALLIED. I think you should go read up a bit more on Naval/Air engagements.

Paul

redcoat
10-05-2008, 05:57 PM
As a torpedo bomber, it had to be able to fly slow. Drop a torpedo too fast or from too high, it will break apart (torpedoes are very sensitive machines).
Jan
At the start of the war the Luftwaffe wanted to make the HE 115 floatplane its main torpedo bomber, unfortunately for the Luftwaffe, the He 115 couldn't fly slow enough (without falling out of the sky) to successfully launch the standard German airbourne torpedo. The top speed of the He 115 was 217mph !!!!!!!
It wasn't until May 1940 that the Germans managed to improve the speed at which their air-bourne torpedoes could be dropped, enough for the HE 115 to be equipped with it

aly j
10-05-2008, 07:58 PM
The Swordfish was responsible for sinking more enemy ships than any other allied aircraft of WW2. Obsolete she may have been, deadly she most certainly was....

One obsolete swordfish can disable or destroy the biggest war ship of her time.
Maybe the British did have and answer for those too ships.
How embrassining for the Germans. cheers.

SS Ouche-Vittes
10-05-2008, 10:13 PM
sorry gunner-B!!. wasn't the bismark blown up by the crew after the rudder damage?

aly j
10-06-2008, 12:13 AM
SS Ouche-Vittes

Please read my thread again and you will see that I mention the word ALLIED. I think you should go read up a bit more on Naval/Air engagements.

Paul

Hey is that youre real name paul.

gunner-B
10-06-2008, 12:19 AM
SS Ouche-Vittes

No. She was smashed to a mass of scrap by King George V, Rodney and the Cruisers Suffolk & Dorsetshire. She 'May' have been scuttled, not 'blown up' as you say.

gunner-B
10-06-2008, 12:27 AM
aly j

Yes, Paul is my real name....

aly j
10-06-2008, 12:45 AM
aly j

Yes, Paul is my real name....

:cool:Most of us sign with our user name. Feels like i know you.
Are you guys still talking about bismarck or the british ships?

gunner-B
10-06-2008, 05:08 PM
Dear old Ted Briggs, the last survivor from the Hood/Bismarck Denmark Strait engagement, has died over the weekend, at the ripe old age of 85. Rest in Peace.

At the going down of the Sun, and in the morning, we shall remember them....

Paul

aly j
10-06-2008, 07:35 PM
sorry gunner-B!!. wasn't the bismark blown up by the crew after the rudder damage?

Yes the rudder was damaged bye a Sword fish.

SS Ouche-Vittes
10-07-2008, 06:01 PM
Yes the rudder was damaged bye a Sword fish.

Yes i know that already, I just added that part in so people know that I'm saying the ship was damaged first but then blown up. My question was, if it was blown up by its crew. bleh!:roll:

pdf27
10-07-2008, 06:11 PM
My question was, if it was blown up by its crew. bleh!:roll:
Doesn't much matter - it was a barely floating scrapheap by the time the order was given to scuttle it. Indeed, IIRC there is some evidence of 16" shells from Rodney going straight through the Bismarck by the end of the engagement.

By the way, definitions of German WW2 naval victories in WW2 are as follows:

Strategic Victory: Captain survives long enough to order the scuttling of the ship.
Tactical Victory: Senior officer left alive gives the order to scuttle before abandoning ship.
Moral Victory: Any member of the crew yells "scuttle" while diving over the side.

aly j
10-12-2008, 11:02 PM
Yes i know that already, I just added that part in so people know that I'm saying the ship was damaged first but then blown up. My question was, if it was blown up by its crew. bleh!:roll:

But no one really knows who blew it up.
The Germans with there prized ship Bismarck are automaticly going to take the credit if really the English destoyed the Bismarck, the Germans wont amitt it.
If the Germans did have the final say with blowing up Bismark,the English wont amitt it either.
NO one knows.
Germans saying they blew it up.
The English say that there battle ships had the final say.
I have no idea who had the final say with Bismarck.
Cheers

pdf27
10-13-2008, 02:29 AM
The English say that there battle ships had the final say.
"The English" largely see the argument as irrelevant. No matter whether or not it was scuttled, it is now as the bottom of the Atlantic as a result of RN action.

gunner-B
10-13-2008, 05:11 AM
It doesn't matter that the Bismarck was scuttled because she was no longer a Battleship, just a "floating" wreck, only fit as a deep sea fishing platform.

Paul

CliSwe
01-02-2009, 01:29 PM
Apparently, the decisive blows were struck by the slow, unglamorous Rodney in the opening 5 minutes: a 16" shell from her opening broadside went straight through the face of Bismarck's A turret. In other words, she found the range with her very first shots. Thereafter, it was what our US cousins would call a "turkey shoot". The shiny new KGV apparently fell victim to the teething troubles inherent in the new quad 14" mounts, and played only a minor role in Bismarck's destruction. Rodney was long overdue for a refit at the time, and firing her heavy armament sorely damaged her comparatively light (35,000t) hull. If the Germans want to claim they scuttled her, OK. The outcome is unchanged: 1 x German battleship less, courtesy of the RN.

Cheers,
Cliff

Joel109
02-03-2009, 07:51 AM
After the Bismarck sank the Hood, the English basically ganged up on Bismarck and left Bismarck with little or no hope of survival due to the sheer number of English ships brought against her. The Swordfish hit was a lucky hit and was the beginning of the end for Bismarck.