Current Affairs Ukraine

[Rita_Poon]

1940 sir charles forbes. Admiral of the fleet.

After retiring on 24 August 1943, Forbes pursued his interests in golf and lived at Cawsand Place at Wentworth in Surrey. He attended the funeral of King George VI in February 1952 and the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II in June 1953. He died at the Queen Alexandra Military Hospital in London on 28 August 1960.

Yep, that's a lad from a toxic waste estate if I've ever read about one.

 

[Rita_Poon]

 

[Tennessee Blue Mike]

I remember my father, who served on the Duke of York battleship, telling me about the shock this caused in the Navy and the country. Our most feared ship, a freak salvo, munitions spread around the ship, 3 survivors …..

Yes this put the fear in the public as at the timethe Royal Navy was feared around the globe. Ark Royal returned the favour to the Bismarck later in the war.

 

[peteblue]

Yes this put the fear in the public as at the timethe Royal Navy was feared around the globe. Ark Royal returned the favour to the Bismarck later in the war.

Just 3 days later in fact…….

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

More detail.on the EU pincer move on Orban.

 

[Mrk]

In fact, it was a mistake to send Hood at Bismarck, the admiralty knew she couldn't match her and sent her anyway and suffered the losses. All those sailors sent into battle with miniscule chances. Thanks tory high command.

This is actually untrue - the Hood was one of the only ships capable of hunting the Bismarck down and engaging it. In the normal course of battle the Hood and the battleship that joined it should have easily been able to initiate battle on their terms and inflict enough damage to cause the Bismarck to try and return to port until more ships could arrive to sink it.

 

[Rita_Poon]

"Despite the basic similarities, there were nonetheless serious differences between the two ships: Bismarck was a modern battleship in the truest sense. Her critical spaces were well protected by excellent internal compartmentalisation and high quality heavy armour. She also boasted state of the art electronics plus highly accurate and rapid firing gunnery systems. She and her sister Tirpitz were arguably among the best ships at that time.

In comparison, Hood was well-built for her day (1920), but by 1941 was nonetheless an aged ship. She had mostly adequate protection but she had a great deal of open spaces and lacked the compartmentalisation seen in more modern battleships. Though her speed had been reduced over the years, at 29 knots, she was still fast for her size. Her guns were deadly, but she suffered from outdated gunnery systems. She did boast advanced radar, but her crew hadn't much time to become proficient in its use.

Simply put, in a one-on-one fight, Bismarck could absorb more damage while firing faster and more accurately than Hood. Each ship had the ability to sink or severely damage the other, but Bismarck had an advantage. This is not totally a negative reflection on Hood, but simply an observance that Bismarck was 20 years more modern than she. Bismarck’s design reflected all that had been learned between the times the two ships were built."

Bismarck had thicker and more modern armour, and there was still the issue of british ordinance. She could also outdo Hood in terms of rate of fire. It was a cataclysm of a decision.

 

[Mrk]

Simply put, in a one-on-one fight, Bismarck could absorb more damage while firing faster and more accurately than Hood.

But it wasn't a one-on-one fight... that's the point lol

If the Hood had been sent alone, that would have been reckless. But it wasn't, it was joined by one of the UK's newest battleships at the time.

 

[Rita_Poon]

Prince of Wales had malfunctioning main battery, And it was Bismarck and Prinz Eugen vs P.o.w and Hood. The two German ships concentrated on Hood and finished her in under 4 minutes - gone. Then pounded P.o.w who turned tail and ran. Cruisers Norfolk and Suffolk ought to have been there in support and the four could have picked Eugen off and surrounded Bismarck. That didn't happen and they sent a past it Hood to slaughter against a far superior ship.

Hubris if ever there was.

 

[Mrk]

Prince of Wales had malfunctioning main battery, And it was Bismarck and Prinz Eugen vs P.o.w and Hood. The two German ships concentrated on Hood and finished her in under 4 minutes - gone. Then pounded P.o.w who turned tail and ran. Cruisers Norfolk and Suffolk ought to have been there in support and the four could have picked Eugen off and surrounded Bismarck. That didn't happen and they sent a past it Hood to slaughter against a far superior ship.

Hubris if ever there was.

Okay, we’re making good progress here, at least we’ve dispelled the ‘one-on-one’ myth.

As for the Prince of Wales, that scored a hit on the Bismarck that ultimately proved fatal, so it did its job.

Next?

 

[Rita_Poon]

Okay, we’re making good progress here, at least we’ve dispelled the ‘one-on-one’ myth.

As for the Prince of Wales, that scored a hit on the Bismarck that ultimately proved fatal, so it did its job.

Next?

The swordfish delivered that decisive blow, the fuel loss shot from P.o.w forced their hand to bring her into port asap and so into harms way from air. And again, 1 vs 1 Bismarck was vastly superior.

 

[Mrk]

the fuel loss shot from P.o.w forced their hand to bring her into port asap and so into harms way from air.

Exactly! Had the Prince of Wales not inflicted that damage, the Bismarck would have been free to escape into the Atlantic and do untold damage. It was only sunk because it had no choice but to return to port due to the damage inflicted. So the Prince of Wales was critical to the sinking of Bismarck.

And again, 1 vs 1 Bismarck was vastly superior.

1. Who said otherwise?
2. Neither the Hood or Prince of Wales would have been allowed to engage the Bismarck one-on-one

The UK's entire naval strategy for hundreds of years was to employ force of numbers at greater speed against powerful ships such as the Bismarck and they were very very good at it.

 

[Rita_Poon]

Exactly! Had the Prince of Wales not inflicted that damage, the Bismarck would have been free to escape into the Atlantic and do untold damage. It was only sunk because it had no choice but to return to port due to the damage inflicted. So the Prince of Wales was critical to the sinking of Bismarck.

1. Who said otherwise?
2. Neither the Hood or Prince of Wales would have been allowed to engage the Bismarck one-on-one

The UK's entire naval strategy for hundreds of years was to employ force of numbers at greater speed against powerful ships such as the Bismarck and they were very very good at it.

Bismarck was heading to Brest not to recover damage but to refuel as salt water had tainted one of the fuel tanks. The swordfish biplane then torpedoed the rudder and crippled her. You may dislike the comparison of Bismarck vs Hood but it's been of note for naval battle history ever since. the british believed the threat of their ships would put the Germans off, they gambled wrongly. A hail Mary torpedo hit from a WWI era plane brought Bismarck down. What luck gives with one hand (the shot that lit up the Hood powder magazine) it takes with the other hand (torpedo miracle).

 

[Rita_Poon]

This is actually untrue - the Hood was one of the only ships capable of hunting the Bismarck down and engaging it. In the normal course of battle the Hood and the battleship that joined it should have easily been able to initiate battle on their terms and inflict enough damage to cause the Bismarck to try and return to port until more ships could arrive to sink it.

Exactly! Had the Prince of Wales not inflicted that damage, the Bismarck would have been free to escape into the Atlantic and do untold damage. It was only sunk because it had no choice but to return to port due to the damage inflicted. So the Prince of Wales was critical to the sinking of Bismarck.

1. Who said otherwise?
2. Neither the Hood or Prince of Wales would have been allowed to engage the Bismarck one-on-one

The UK's entire naval strategy for hundreds of years was to employ force of numbers at greater speed against powerful ships such as the Bismarck and they were very very good at it.

ahem.

 

[Mrk]

Bismarck was heading to Brest not to recover damage but to refuel as salt water had tainted one of the fuel tanks.

That's almost literally what I said? lol The damage the PoW inflicted caused the fuel to be contaminated.

You may dislike the comparison of Bismarck vs Hood but it's been of note for naval battle history ever since.

The Bismarck was a vastly superior ship to the Hood. You seem to be arguing with yourself on this point.

ahem.

Did you quote the wrong bit? I can't see anywhere that says Hood was superior 1 on 1.

---

On a serious note though, this is a good example of why you should know what you're talking about before trying to debate it on the internet. Don't worry though I do the same every week in the match thread...