Battleships

[silverpig]

<<NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

I cringe every time at the end of Under Siege when he says "here's my move". NOOOOOO!>>


Pffft. Everyone knows the worst line in that movie is "Nobody beats me in the kitchen."


haha

 

[Pocatello]

The day they built the aircraft carriers, the battleships was doomed. The Japanese demonstrated that very well during Pearl Harbor. During the Battle of Midway, both navies slugged it out without any ship ever seeing each other.

 

[Instagib]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones
Oh Yeah

Wow

 

[Nemesis77]

This is true. In fact, the North Carolina class most likely could have taken the Bismarck out due to superior fire control and bigger guns.

Not necessarily. Allied experts analyzed the Bismarck based on captured blueprints and detailed technical data. And their conclusion was that it was on par or superior to other battleships of it's time.

But, in the end, you must remember what the ships were designed for. This comment (over at
kbismarck.com forums):

The ranking of any BB is a factor of the context within which the ship is to be used. For a Pacific operation that required long range, high speed, and great AA capacity, an Iowa would be my choice. For a long range brawl against ememy BB's and CA's, the Yamato is a good choice. For a mixed battle at relatively short ranges, give me the Bismarck. If one wanted to rate them, he or she should do it with mission in mind. For example, with regard to underwater protection, the SoDak, Iowa, KGV, and Littorio are probably a bit less robust than the Yamato, Bismarck, and Rich.. Passive gunnery protection depends on range, with Yamato and Iowa have advantages at great range, while the Bismarck and Littorio may be at least their equal at short range. So there is no easy answer to this question. Moreover, it is rediculous to take an absolute position given the vagaries inherent in battle contexts. In short, mission dictates what ships are ideal.

Couldn't have said it better myself

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
The best battleship comparison

That comparison is flawed. As said by someone in the know in the kbismarck.com forums:

know the site you mention, and the ratings are utterly absurd, the stuff of a person who has rationalized himself into a series of rediculous position. For example, how can the Iowa rate a 9 in terms of underwater protection when she was KNOWN to have a defective TBD? How can she rate a 10 in gunnery when the Mark 21 fuses in her shells were known to be defective? How can her control be a ten when the Iowas 16" guns had rather indifferent accuracy, due in part to their light weight (and thus high whip) and the fact that the long-range trajectory charts were defective? If one goes through the list systematically, it becomes the stuff of humor rather than serious discourse. Simply send him an e-mail pointing these things out, but it'll do NO GOOD. Once one gets mind-lock, seeing anything outside the bubble just doesn't happen -- which may be my problem!

 

[Shockwave]

Well, how about re-enactments....This stuff looks WAY fun, been thinkin of doin it myself..
Linky #1
Linky #2
Linky #3

Theres a bunch of stuff on this, just search google for model warship combat or soemthing along those lines.

 

[Pacfanweb]

<<Once one gets mind-lock, seeing anything outside the bubble just doesn't happen -- which may be my problem!>>

Exactly. The Bismarck was a great ship, no doubt, FOR ITS TIME. But its time ended in May 1941. The North Carolinas, South Dakotas, and Iowas didn't start hitting the water until about that time, and none were commissioned until 1942.
So they aren't truly contemporaries.

BTW, here's an excerpt from the kbismarck page on the final battle of Bismarck:

"0847. The final battle begins. Rodney opens fire.

0849. Turrets "Anton" and "Bruno" open fire at Rodney.

0902. Bismarck is hit for the first time. Foretop command post disabled.

0908. Forward command post disabled. Turrets "Anton" and "Bruno" out of action.

0913. After command post disabled. Turrets "C&auml;sar" and "Dora" proceed to local fire.

0921. Turret "Dora" out of action.

0927. Turret "Anton" or "Bruno" fires one last salvo.

0931. Turret "C&auml;sar" fires the last salvo and is put out of action. Main battery silenced. "


So the Bismarck never hit Rodney or King George V, and the first hit by Rodney knocked out A and B turrets. 5 minutes later, C and D turrets were knocked out and Bismarck was basically defenseless.
Rodney, FYI, was equipped with 16" 45 caliber guns, same as the North Carolina and South Dakota classes.
No, the gunfire didn't sink the ship, but staying afloat is pretty much irrelevant if you can't shoot back.
So yes, I still believe that any of the US fast battleships could have taken the Bismarck due to superior armament and fire control.

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: PacfanwebExactly. The Bismarck was a great ship, no doubt, FOR ITS TIME. But its time ended in May 1941. The North Carolinas, South Dakotas, and Iowas didn't start hitting the water until about that time, and none were commissioned until 1942.
So they aren't truly contemporaries.

So it's pointless to compare those ships.

BTW, here's an excerpt from the kbismarck page on the final battle of Bismarck:

<SNIP>

You are forgetting few things. First of all, the crew of Bismarck was exhausted. They had been in battle-stations for the last 4 days, and the night before the final battle Bismarck was attacked by several destroyers. That battle took entire night. And, Bismarck was already damaged when the last battle started. They were unable to change course due to damaged rudder and the speed of the ship was slow. Bismarck didn't have the capability to avoid shells from the british ships, nor did it have the ability to change position to bring all it's main guns to bear. And of course, Bismarck was fighting against two battleships and two battlecruisers (to my knowledge there were also destroyers present). Hardly a fair fight.

Knowing those facts, you still claim that "Any US Battleship could have taken the Bismarck"? The final battle of Bismarck was a battle between one damaged battleship with exhausted crew against overwhelming enemy force. And you use that battle to determine that any US Battleships could have taken the Bismarck.

If a damaged Iowa-class battleship had faced the Yamato, Musashi and several others japanese ships, and was promptly destroyed with little effort from the japanese side, do you think it would give fair demonstration of the fighting capabilites of the Iowa-class?

 

[Pacfanweb]

<<Knowing those facts, you still claim that "Any US Battleship could have taken the Bismarck"? >>

Yes. The crew being tired has nothing to do with accuracy. It doesn't take effort to aim.

And about having a battle vs. destroyers "all night":

"2238. Sighted by Polish destroyer Piorun.

2242. Opens fire against Piorun.

2325. Bismarck reports to Group West: "Am surrounded by Renown and light forces."

2357. Bismarck reports: "To the F&uuml;hrer of the German Reich, Adolf Hitler: We shall fight to the last man with confidence in you, my F&uuml;hrer, and with rock-solid trust in Germany's victory!"

27 May 1941 (Tuesday):

0217. Bismarck reports to Supreme Commander of the Navy (Grossadmiral Raeder): "Submitting application for awarding the Knight?s Cross to Korvettenkapit&auml;n Schneider for the sinking of Hood!"
0500. Bismarck reports to Group West: "50% overcast, ceiling 600 meters. [Wind] from NW at force 7."

0625. Bismarck reports to Group West: "Situation unchanged, wind force 8 to 9."

0710. Last report from Bismarck to Group West: "Send U-boat for safe-keeping of war diary!"

0844. Sighted by King George V and Rodney. Speed seven knots. "

Doesn't sound like and all-night battle to me. And you don't think the British crews were at battle stations most of the night, too?
The crew being tired had nothing to do with it.
Not being able to manuever was definitely most of the problem.

Bottom line, one on one, Bismarck most likely would have beaten King George V. Rodney would have been much tougher. The hits from Rodney are what knocked out Bismarck's turrets. They probably could have held up being hit by 14" shells from KGV.

That's why I give the nod to the American ships. The Bismarck's armor was a bit better then the NC class, not as good as the South Dakota and Iowa classes. That fact is not arguable. It is simple mathematics. American fire control was better, due to advanced radar technology, even at the time of the Bismarck's demise. That would have been a huge advantage, much more so than armor.
Bismarck's guns were probably better at short ranges, which is what they were designed for, and this is also what Bismarck's armor was designed for.
That same advantage was a huge disadvantage at longer ranges, which is what the US ships were designed for. Bismarck's armor would easily be defeated by 16" shells from long range. Short range, too, just not as badly.

Now in a real battle, anything could happen. A lucky hit early on could tilt the scales in favor of most any inferior battleship.
Odds are, however, against that. Not that is COULDN'T happen, but was much less likely.

I still would have liked to have seen many of the possible match-ups for real.

<<Bismarck was fighting against two battleships and two battlecruisers >>

No. Rodney and KGV at first, others joined after the main turrets were silenced. I agree that the British had overwhelming force, and would've beaten the Bismarck even if it wasn't damaged, just would have taken longer.

 

[MadRat]

<<2238. Sighted by Polish destroyer Piorun.
2242. Opens fire against Piorun.>>

I believe this is the destroyer that capitulated the Bismarck's bridge with six close-range shots, too. The Bismarck was not designed for fending off lighter forces, something the American designs were more than adequately geared to defend against.

 

[KpocAlypse]

To add...(don't think this was posted)

If you have some time, there is a breakdown of the KM Bismarck armor online, not sure about how authentic it is.

Armor Protection of the Battleship KM Bismarck by Nathan Okun

EDIT: really really long article BTW..

 

[Nemesis77]

As to the all-night destroyer battle From kbismarck.com):

At about 2145, Bismarck fired six salvoes from nine miles against the Sheffield that had just come insight. The British cruiser turned away and headed north. The Sheffield was not hit but some splinters disabled her radar, killed three men and injured six more.5 At 2200, the Sheffield made contact with the destroyers of the 4th Flotilla (Captain Philip L. Vian) Cossack, Maori, Zulu, Sikh and Piorun, and gave them the approximate bearing and distance to the Bismarck.

At 2238, the Polish destroyer Piorun (Commander Eugeninsz Plawski) sighted the Bismarck that responded a few minutes later with three salvoes. The destroyers proceeded to attack but Bismarck defended herself vigorously in the dark. At 2342, splinters knocked down Cossack's antennas. Shortly after 0000, star shells from the destroyers began to illuminate the area. At about 0100, a star shell fell on Bismarck's bows starting a fire there that had to be extinguished by some crew members. Throughout all the night the destroyers attacked the German battleship. These attacks were carried out under heavy seas, rain squalls and low visibility, and no torpedo hits were obtained on Bismarck that time and again repelled every attack with heavy and accurate fire from her main and secondary batteries.

So Bismarck was attacked by 5 destroyers and the battle took entire night.

As to the crew being exhausted... You honestly believe that exhausted crew has no ill-effects when it comes to combat-effectiveness of a ship???

As to the superior fire-controls on american ships. As was commented on the kbismarck-forums (commenting on the battleship-comparison), the Iowa-class had faulty detonators in it's shells, it's guns had high whiplash, which degraded accuracy and the long range trajectory-charts were faulty. While the radar rangefinder was better than on Bismarck, it's not an end-all thingy that guarantees american shops victory against any enemy.

<<Bismarck was fighting against two battleships and two battlecruisers >>

No. Rodney and KGV at first, others joined after the main turrets were silenced. I agree that the British had overwhelming force, and would've beaten the Bismarck even if it wasn't damaged, just would have taken longer.

No. Rodney opened fire on Bismarck at 0847, KGV a minute later. Bismarck returns fire at 0849. Norfolk joined battle at 0854 (7 minutes after battle had started). Bismarck was first hit at 0902. Dorsetshire opened fire at 0904. First turrets of Bismarck were knocked out at 0908.

We could argue about this 'till hell freezes over, but we can't know for sure, since that battle (US Battleship vs. Bismarck) never took place. If you are interested on the subject, read the kbismarck forums (there has been some "what if" threads there), there are alot of people there who seem to know alot more than we do (some of them write books about battleships!)

As to the who sinked Bismarck. That is still being debated to this day. Order was given to sink the Bismarck by opening the valves, but it's not sure that did the ship sink because of that, or because of the torpedoes fired at point-blank range. Bismarck propably sank because of both.

 

[MadRat]

I find it ironic that a ship that was training its guns all night would be so inneffective suddenly when it counts. That is unless its tactical center in the bridge was destroyed and each battery had to act alone because of the lack of central coordination. The ship was capitulated when the bridge was battered by the Polish destroyer. If any one factor made her main batteries ineffective it was this event.

Nem, I hate to say it but the kbismarck forums don't have the same credibility as an expert. We have no way to verify thier information. It would probably be pretty easy to find other sources online than them don't you think?

btw - Anyone find any more movies to point out?

 

[Nemesis77]

Originally posted by: MadRat
I find it ironic that a ship that was training its guns all night would be so inneffective suddenly when it counts. That is unless its tactical center in the bridge was destroyed and each battery had to act alone because of the lack of central coordination. The ship was capitulated when the bridge was battered by the Polish destroyer. If any one factor made her main batteries ineffective it was this event.

I have no knowledge as to did the destroyers hit Bismarck with their guns. I do know that none of the torpedoes hit. Bismarck wasn't really effective during the battle against the destroyers, none of the destroyers sunk and I don't know that were there any direct hits by Bismarck.

As to the next day... Like I said, the crew had been up all night, they were exhausted. And the main targeting array was damaged early on, so the main guns had to go to local-fire which is not as accurate. Bismarck did get shots within 20 meters of Rodney before the targeting system was damaged (in fact, the british were amazed that Bismarck could get shots so close to it's target so soon). Hadn't Rodney hit Bismarck when it did, Bismarck would have scored hits pretty soon.

Nem, I hate to say it but the kbismarck forums don't have the same credibility as an expert. We have no way to verify thier information. It would probably be pretty easy to find other sources online than them don't you think?

Sure you could verify their info: just read some books on the subject . There seems to be few guys there who actually write books about battleships, so I think there are pretty knowledgeable folks there.

btw - Anyone find any more movies to point out?

Ooops, sorry. I guess we turned your thread in to a battleship pissing-contest . Maybe we should put this thread back on to the subject, which is movies about battleships.

 

[MadRat]

I don't mind the battleship conversations. Just from time to time lets post a new pic or movie or something, too.