Alternate warships of nations

Really? I mean, the after section of the ship is utterly destroyed.....
The center section is not And most of the aft is present. Blast and tear damage is present there and we use that to ascertain the direction of the internal explosion. Refer to page 5 for rudder position and other details in the citation as to the wreck condition.

Also discussion here.

Some correction is to be made in here, as HMS Hood's wreckage shows clearly the ship was not broken in two, but in three major parts. A BBC Documentary once showed the wreckage and a computeranimated simulation, how this could have happened. (There also is a good piece of literature of: Mearns, D.: "Hood and Bismarck", ISBN-10: 0752220357, or ISBN-13: 978-0752220352.)

HMS Hood was hit in the main after magazine by a 15 inch shell of Bismarck, resulting in a direct detonation of all the powder of both 15 inch and 4 inch magazines, breaking of the sternsection, but secondarily resulted in a shockwave moving foreward, detonating the foreward main magazine as well. The large piece of wreckage flung into the air, observed by both Germans and British sailors was NOT a main gunturret, but the Armored Controll Tower, which is completely seperated of the main wreck, some hundreds of yards away from the actual wreck. Sinche the complete bow is missing too, it can only be the result of a foreward magazine explosion as the CT itself is not the lightest part of the ship, weiging several hundreds of tons at least. The force needed to seperate such a heavy part of the ship is enormeous, and only the explosive power of the main magazine (several dozens of tons of high explosives).

USS Arizona's magazine explosion was localized in her foreward magazine only, resulting in the ship slpitting in two parts, making this different from HMS Hood's catastrophic loss. More likely, USS Arizona's misshap was more simmilar to the one on the Russian Marat, after hits from Luftwaffe Stuka's. Also the magazine explosion on Bretagne was localized, and reulsted in the loss of the ship, as it was broken in two. (as was IJN Mutsu, due to a defective cordite load in her after magazine in 1943.)
I have to correct the information on the HIJMS Mutsu. A stupid Japanese sailor, it is claimed, threw a live cigarette down into the magazine and started a small fire that was not extinguished near exposed powder bags which were not cased in fireproof cans as they were supposed to be. She blew up due to human error.
 
Last edited:
The center section is not And most of the aft is present. Blast and tear damage is present there and we use that to ascertain the direction of the internal explosion. Refer to page 5 for rudder position and other details in the citation as to the wreck condition.

Also discussion here.

++Snip++
Ok, that pdf is new to me, I'll read it :)

I should have said the area around the aft magazines is obliterated. The stern from'Y' barbette (About 1/2 way around) is kinda intact...
 
I have to correct the information on the HIJMS Mutsu. A stupid Japanese sailor, it is claimed, threw a live cigarette down into the magazine and started a small fire that was not extinguished near exposed powder bags which were not cased in fireproof cans as they were supposed to be. She blew up due to human error.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't something similar happen to the Mikasa(albeit she got refloated and repaired)
 
Hoods FC is higher up, and obviously an Admiralty FC rather than the Dreyer V. That alone may aid in correctly spotting Bismarck compared to mixing it up otl.
Then you've got gunnery. Hood landed her first salvo just off Prinz Eugens bow before changing to target Bismarck and working back to find the range. If she's targeting Bismarck from the start, you've got a good chance of hitting early on.
Next point, Bismarck’s golden BB. I had an entire argument with someone about where it was likely to have hit, probably through the upper belt and through the bend in the "turtleback".
With the deck armour extended out to the inner hull wall that won't happen.
Suffolk and Norfolk aren't that far behind, but Holland needs to slow the germans down for the cruisers to catch up.
If Hood lands hits on Bismarck early enough she could pull a Rodney knocking out FC and turrets. Prinz Eugen needs to be dealt with, british battlecruisers had a knack for dodging torpedoes, but yeah I wouldn't want to risk it.
Simultaneously I can't imagine Hood handling the hits PoW took, but she can presumably fire back unlike PoW. Going to be a pretty gruesome knife fight if Lutzens doesn't try to run.
Worked up PoW is a big game changer, 18 heavy guns firing consistently and (pretty) reliably at Bismarck at PE isn't ending well.
Hood hitting a fast moving target at medium to long range in may 1941 is a tricky thing to start with, as her main weakness was not just her protection, but even more her outdated firecontrol system, which still was the same thing as when the ship was built some 20 years earlier, with no more modern equipment still. This made it even more sad the planned refit and reconstruction would have countered these major defects, had war not broken out in 1939.

See:

The only addition to HMS Hood was the installation of a single set of the type 284 radar in early 1941. Nothing else was done to upgrade the firecontrol, nor other equipment as a total reconstruction was still scheduled to take plane to the lines of HMS Renown.
 
Speaking of HMS Hood and her fatal hit.

I was reading that when Bismarck's shell struck PoW below the water (The dud), it entered the water short, travelled down then arched back up, penetrated the hull, deflected 20 degrees forward and then came to a stop against the TT bulkhead.

I realize the fatal hit on Hood was seen from PoW, but could it have punched through the armour then defected inside the hull into the magazines? If so, it could quite as easily deflected forward say, AWAY from the magazines. That would have disabled some engines and in turn reduced Hoods speed. What would happen in that instance? Bis and PE would run hard but would PoW stay with Hood or pursue alone?
The angle of entry makes that higly unlikely as the shell came in under an angle if some 30 to 40 degrees from the ship's side facing aft. Deflecting in a forward direction would have meant the change in direction would equal, of exceed 50 degrees, which is unlikely in terms of mathematical science, as only a heavy armored bulkhead could do this, something HMS hood was not known to posses once penetration of the side armor was achieved.

See:

The internal protection of HMS Hood was made up of very thin plating at best, mostly acting as splinter protection, not capable of holding against a full AP shell. Being a Great War design, the protective scheme of HMS hood was centered on the external protection, with very little of internal protection still, as the accent was on the sidearmor in the form of a relatively thick angled beltarmor (for that timeframe at least), correcting a lot of defects in earlier battlecruiser designs. With battle ranges at this time not exceeding around 10,000 yards in most cases, it was deemed efficient. With the time battle ranges grew in size, but HMS hood did not get her needed refit to correct this. Only am much more thickened deckarmor and total revission of internal protection would have corrected this.
 
IDKE about that one. The light conditions were "terrible". Was the FoV in the lens setup superior enough to spot silhouette size differences at those ranges?
Prince of Wales almost immediately corrected it's aim to Bismarck in the same terrible conditions, slightly further away from Bismarck than Hood.
Some of seems to be done to this guy " Prince of Wales the 1st Artillery Officer, Lieutenant Commander Colin W. McMullen, just transferred from Hood, recognized the Bismarck and ordered the artillery to be directed to the second ship on the line" but nonetheless he recognised her from that range. Hoods main rangefinders were located on the top of the conning tower (quite low) and on top of the tripod (good position in terms of height, but terrible vibration apparently). With a Castle type superstructure FC is in a tall and very stable position.
IDKE about that one. The light conditions were "terrible". Was the FoV in the lens setup superior enough to spot silhouette size differences at those ranges?



Here is a good point. Hood was the West Virginia of the Royal Navy; which means her shooting was "excellent" as in being a fleet champion.
Might've scored the only gunnery kill on a dreadnought, being Bretagne, but we'll never know for sure, wasn't something the crew was keen on gloating about, whether Hood, Valiant or Resolution.
IDKE about that one. The light conditions were "terrible". Was the FoV in the lens setup superior enough to spot silhouette size differences at those ranges?



Here is a good point. Hood was the West Virginia of the Royal Navy; which means her shooting was "excellent" as in being a fleet champion.


Another good point. Hard to argue that if the shell hit had not reached into that seam that a Yamato type magazine explosion would have happened. Two meters anywhere offset else? Golden BBs seem to have been a WWII BB curse with Royal Oak, Roma, Arizona and Prince of Wales all getting one. It was a miracle that Pennsylvania did not join the list.
The odds of some are certainly pretty goddamn unlikely. You can see why sailors are a superstitious lot.
Again I do not know the protection scheme well enough, but it sounds right to me.
I can't seem to upload the pics necessary, but basically with 11" you can punch through the 7" belt and in through the turtleback. It's almost exactly like the tests they did on a model of hoods armour scheme in the 20's, except the angle is less. Here's the real kicker. Seems Hood was turning 20° to port to bring her broadside to bear. Even a very slight keel would've made the shells penetration easier, as the incline is negated somewhat. At 11° it would've penetrated at the base of the 7" belt, any lower and it would've probably bounced or been greatly slowed by the belt and stopped by the deck armour. Basically they had tested the armour perfectly in the 20's, made recommendation, hell even had armour removed from the torpedo platform to compensate for the weight, but ultimately never extended the deck armour when the test showed that it would deflect with the armour out to the inside of the hull.
Here I am knowledgeable. As long as the British keep a 100 second run time torpedo distance (~ 6000 meters) as Lee did at Second Guadalcanal against Japanese Type 93s from about a half dozen IJN ships who launched 40 of them at USS Washington and missed with all of them, there is no way the Prinz Eugen's LOUSY by comparison torpedoes can reach Holland that he cannot dance out of their wakes.
Hood fired her torpedoes seemingly very close to her demise, PE and Bismarck had to turn away, which gave PoW enough breathing space to get the hell out of there. If PoWs secondaries get going, along with a refitted Hoods, not going to be a fun time for the cruiser. PoW never got closer than 10k, somewhere around 12,000 metres from Bismarck before she turned.
 
Hood hitting a fast moving target at medium to long range in may 1941 is a tricky thing to start with, as her main weakness was not just her protection, but even more her outdated firecontrol system, which still was the same thing as when the ship was built some 20 years earlier, with no more modern equipment still. This made it even more sad the planned refit and reconstruction would have countered these major defects, had war not broken out in 1939.

See:

The only addition to HMS Hood was the installation of a single set of the type 284 radar in early 1941. Nothing else was done to upgrade the firecontrol, nor other equipment as a total reconstruction was still scheduled to take plane to the lines of HMS Renown.
I'm very well aware of the lacking in the Dreyer V table, this is if she'd been refitted with Admiralty table. (Aka a full rebuild)
Even then she barely missed with her first salvo. The angle of attack and weather was about as shit a set of cards Hood and Holland could've hoped for.
 
I'm very well aware of the lacking in the Dreyer V table, this is if she'd been refitted with Admiralty table. (Aka a full rebuild)
Even then she barely missed with her first salvo. The angle of attack and weather was about as shit a set of cards Hood and Holland could've hoped for.
Actually HMS Hood's first six salvoes were way off the target (Prinz Eugen), as were the first eleven!!!! salvoes of HMS Prince off Wales on Bismarck. HMS Hood's 7th salvo was a straddle on the german Cruiser. HMS Hood did not get time to aim straight as the commander ordered both a turn (to bring the aft turrets to bear), as well as a shifting target to Bismarck shortly after this, which all was to be in veign. The ship had no time to shoot at Bismarck as the fatal hit occured by this time as well.

The accuracy of the HMS hood was so fragmented, as she did only fire the two forward turrets, while on high speed in rough seas, causing severe problems in stability as a gunnery platform. The more stable German ships, both of which having better targeting control and a better sight on target, had a serious advantage in this stage. (Tactical error of the British Admiral in charge, having to fight with his ships visible in the raising sunlight against darkened targets in the west.) Strangely the gunnery officer on HMS Prince of Wales had a better identification of the two German ships shooting at the correct target from start, while the older, more experienced Gunnery officer on HMS Hood did not.
 
Here's the real kicker. Seems Hood was turning 20° to port to bring her broadside to bear. Even a very slight keel would've made the shells penetration easier, as the incline is negated somewhat.
Hood was turning to port, but she was engaged on the starboard side. I don't know how much Hood was known to heel, especially in these kinds of conditions, but it would have put the starboard side of the ship down in the water and increased, not decreased, the effective slope of the vertical armor.
 
That (^^^), but even if the declination induced is 1 degree UP instead of DOWN in the heel over, @Hood's point about the difference being the cause for the German shell nose to dig instead of ricochet "should" still be valid. It was the "down" that puzzled me until I realized that up or down as long as it was the LATERAL angle as well as the face direction of the plate that was subtly changed that would make the difference. That was a very complex 2-d strike angle.
 
The two things I vividly remember from the special I watched was that intact torpedoes were found in the wreck (meaning they hadn't exploded which was one of the theories) and that the rudder was hard over meaning Hood was turning at the time she was hit.
 
Hoods main rangefinders were located on the top of the conning tower (quite low) and on top of the tripod (good position in terms of height, but terrible vibration apparently). With a Castle type superstructure FC is in a tall and very stable position.
Is there any driver to get the solid castle type/Queen Anne's mansion superstructure used on WW1 era ships?
 
Actually HMS Hood's first six salvoes were way off the target (Prinz Eugen), as were the first eleven!!!! salvoes of HMS Prince off Wales on Bismarck. HMS Hood's 7th salvo was a straddle on the german Cruiser. HMS Hood did not get time to aim straight as the commander ordered both a turn (to bring the aft turrets to bear), as well as a shifting target to Bismarck shortly after this, which all was to be in veign. The ship had no time to shoot at Bismarck as the fatal hit occured by this time as well.

The accuracy of the HMS hood was so fragmented, as she did only fire the two forward turrets, while on high speed in rough seas, causing severe problems in stability as a gunnery platform. The more stable German ships, both of which having better targeting control and a better sight on target, had a serious advantage in this stage. (Tactical error of the British Admiral in charge, having to fight with his ships visible in the raising sunlight against darkened targets in the west.) Strangely the gunnery officer on HMS Prince of Wales had a better identification of the two German ships shooting at the correct target from start, while the older, more experienced Gunnery officer on HMS Hood did not.
Incorrect and correct in different areas.
"Hood’s first salvo fell near Prinz Eugen but did not actually hit" source: HMS Hood Association.
Holland actually ordered both ships to fire on Bismarck just before the first salvo was fired, hence the poor gunnery afterwards, which seemed to be something between tracking back to Bismarck and then occasionally deciding to fire a PE anyway. There was possibly hesitation from Holland, a few more salvoes and he could zero in and absolutely murder Prinz Eugen, but on the otherhand Bismarck was the threat. The facts get fuzzy here.
"As the ships grew closer, the spotters in Hood realised their mistake. VADM Holland was informed and only moments before opening fire, he ordered 'GOB1' directing that fire be switched to the right hand German ship, Bismarck. This order was definitely communicated to Prince of Wales. It is also believed to have been meant for his own ship as well. Despite this, Hood's target remained the left hand ship, Prinz Eugen. The reason for this failure to switch targets is not exactly known. It may not have been possible to switch over quickly enough or there may have been communications problems.

Note: The timing of the order to switch targets is in some doubt. Hood survivors were sure that Hood shot at least two salvoes before VADM Holland ordered the target switch. On the other hand, Capt Leach of Prince of Wales insisted it came before fire was opened."
Source: HMS Hood Association.
Read my post above the one you quoted, the officer who identified Bismarck on PoW had just been transferred from Hood.

Is there any driver to get the solid castle type/Queen Anne's mansion superstructure used on WW1 era ships?
I mean, QE, Warspite, Renown, Valiant?
Not entirely sure what you mean here
 
By the way does anyone know why the USN didn't install torpedo bulges like those the Enterprise got in 1943 on the Hornet while she was building? After all it couldn't have add more than a couple months to her construction time and it would have probably saved her
 
Top