WI: HMS Hood Manages To Limp Back to Port After Tangling With Bismarck

I know the kinda-sorta consensus on the lucky hit is a shell from Bismarck (impacting at a weak spot due to the Hood's bow wave) making it's way to a point near the 4 inch magazine and cooking that off, which in turn cooked off the 15 inch magazine and that was the end. Personally, I think many undershoot the possibility that one of Hood's aft guns itself initiated the fatal detonation, maybe aided with someone overriding a malfunctioning piece of the flash protection system in the heat of battle.

Then there's this theory I read last night that's....well, you can judge for yourself.
He believes the true explanation has been hiding in plain sight — in eyewitness testimony from Able Seaman Robert Tilburn that was given at the second inquiry and effectively ignored. Tilburn, a Yorkshireman who was 20 years old at the time of the sinking, said that “after Bismark’s second salvo fell [close to Hood but not hitting] the vessel was shaking with a great vibration.”

According to Lawrence, the only way that a ship as large as Hood‘s 48,000 tons could be made to shake like this was through a serious fault in its propulsion system. In his analysis, this most likely involved a propellor shaft breaking out of its bearing mounts and windmilling about until it broke. In his paper, he writes: “There is just nothing else on the ship with sufficient power to do this and there is no reason for Tilburn to make this up; in the disaster that was about to unfold around him, this was something unusual enough that he specifically remembered it.”

Crucially, Hood‘s inner propellor shafts passed within five feet of the main magazines at the rear of the ship, with their 112 tons of explosive cordite. Lawrence continues: “Each of her four propeller shafts was responsible for pushing some 12,000 tons of Hood along, in a storm, at 28 knots; a quite immense amount of power. Any breakage of these shafts or their bearing mounts, themselves of heavy and solid construction, would cause large and quite massive metal pieces, probably hot from explosively disintegrating, to go flying about. These parts would easily have enough energy to smash through local steel walls and with the magazines so close it is inevitable that these would be penetrated in a shower of red hot sparks.”
 
Incorrect. Hood wasn't sailing with awnings rigged, so her after guns had been bare since she'd sailed from Scapa Flow.
I don't understand what this statement is about. Bring guns to bear means putting the ship at an angle to the enemy so they can fire at them.
Incorrect. She was certainly vulnerable at long range, and she wasn't suitable for close-range action against other capital ships, but on the whole she was decently protected.
I don't understand this statement. If she was vulnerable to plunging fire, and to close range fire than her protection was inadequate vs. an enemy battleship.
Not relevent - the fire was being ignored to let it burn itself out, as it posed no risk to the ship.
Letting an ammo fire burn is never a good idea. Fires spread and ammo cooks off. Do you want to be around flying 40mm shells and rockets?
At the range she was hit, her armour scheme provided good to very good protection against 15" shellfire, and for her to be hit by plunging 15" fire was flat out impossible - she was too close.
Sorry, that's an ironic statement because that was the moment her armor was penetrated resulting in a catastrophic explosion. At 16,200 yards the 8" shells were plunging.
I refer you to my earlier post regarding PoW's guns
The point is her guns were unreliable and were failing during combat.
PoW was forced to withdraw because she was now the sole target of Bismarck's gunnery, Nolfolk and Suffolk were still out of range, and she'd been hit repeatedly. It wasn't a matter of the issues with the main battery being the sole problem - without all the other problems that could, and had been, managed.
POW was a modern well protected ship, but her captain didn't consider her a match for Bismarck. Considering she wasn't combat worthy his decision to make smoke and withdraw was a wise one. If Kapitan Linderman had had his way the Germans would've taken the opportunity to finish off the POW and returned to Norway for repairs. When would such an opportunity to sink a 2nd British battleship present itself again? adhering to a general order to avoid combat and attack shipping represented a complete lack of initiative on the part of a flag officer to use his judgement to exploit unforeseen opportunities to damage the enemy.

Sinking POW & Hood and returning to Norway without sinking a single merchant ship would be considered a spectacular success. It would send German morale soring and British morale plunging. It wasn't as if the RN had a lot of modern battleships to take their place. By the late summer Bismarck & Tirpitz would be ready to sortie together on an Atlantic raid. Until Duke of York finished a proper workup in the early fall of 1941 KGV was the only truly modern BBs in the RN. Only the KGV & the Nelson's could stand up to the Bismarck & Tirpitz together. The RN needed BBs in the Med, and with Japan being more of a threat in the fall they needed them in the east as well.
Incorrect. They both had the hammer down trying to close to effective battle range ASAP.
They wouldn't close with Bismarck if Prince of Wales was sinking.
 
Last edited:
Norfolk and Suffolk vs Prinz Eugen and Bismarck is very unlikely to end well for the two cruisers. The pair would be taking a (reasonable in my opinion) risk against a single Graf Spee, but against a near-peer cruiser and a battleship that has just seen off two much stronger ships it would be crazy to attack unless there was a compelling reason to sacrifice them.

They'd be better as a distant threat to force the pair to separate or to get them to waste time and fuel trying to break contact while other ships get into position to help. It might be a bit risky maintaining contact while also ensuring they were just visible - maybe having to risk a few long range salvoes from Bismarck while trying to keep far enough away to make positive ID difficult.
 
A video on potential HMS Hood refits by Drchinifel , my favourite Naval You tuber -
- 46 minutes

Drachinifel's thoughts on the loss of the Hood -
- 42 minutes
The loss of the Hood video is excellent. I would like to point out that it is not just the work of a top tier YouTube naval historian, but it is an accessible version of the work of Bill Jurens, an eminent historian in the field who had direct input in the production of the video.
 
Norfolk and Suffolk vs Prinz Eugen and Bismarck is very unlikely to end well for the two cruisers. The pair would be taking a (reasonable in my opinion) risk against a single Graf Spee, but against a near-peer cruiser and a battleship that has just seen off two much stronger ships it would be crazy to attack unless there was a compelling reason to sacrifice them.

They'd be better as a distant threat to force the pair to separate or to get them to waste time and fuel trying to break contact while other ships get into position to help. It might be a bit risky maintaining contact while also ensuring they were just visible - maybe having to risk a few long range salvoes from Bismarck while trying to keep far enough away to make positive ID difficult.
POW + Norfolk and Suffolk vs. Bismarck and PE does not seem crazy. The two British cruisers by themselves are better off shadowing.
 
POW + Norfolk and Suffolk vs. Bismarck and PE does not seem crazy. The two British cruisers by themselves are better off shadowing.
True, but still a bit marginal with POW not quite fully worked up. And without POW it's likely to end badly even if they get some early lucky hits on Prinz Eugen.
 
So, it seems they want to lose 2 battleships and 2 heavy cruisers. The Germans would love that.
Send out some unescorted carriers - and don't bother scouting - to make the Kriegsmarine's day complete!

Norfolk and Suffolk are much better used for shadowing unless Prinz Eugen separates from Bismarck. Even then, shadowing the main target still looks like a better idea.
 
Honestly I do wonder how Denmark Straight would have shaped out if Holland had kept his six destroyers along with Norfolk and Suffolk in company with his capital ships. Certainly would have added a lot of complications to the Germans.
 
Her guns were unreliable and broke down at different times during the battle. While retreating Y turret jammed meaning they couldn't have replied if the Bismarck had chased her. POW was lucky a 15" shell that hit below the waterline failed to explode, she would've lost at least one boiler room. POW wasn't battle ready and her commitment to the Bismarck chase was only made because the RN was short of battleships at the time. Admiral Holland was heroically leading a unworthy battle force. Hood was too old and vulnerable, and POW was not fully operational, and her crew wasn't well trained yet.
If that shell was going to explode it would have done so when it hit the sea and the only reason it struck POW at all was because it did not.
 
I know the kinda-sorta consensus on the lucky hit is a shell from Bismarck (impacting at a weak spot due to the Hood's bow wave) making it's way to a point near the 4 inch magazine and cooking that off, which in turn cooked off the 15 inch magazine and that was the end. Personally, I think many undershoot the possibility that one of Hood's aft guns itself initiated the fatal detonation, maybe aided with someone overriding a malfunctioning piece of the flash protection system in the heat of battle.

Then there's this theory I read last night that's....well, you can judge for yourself.

Interesting theory I'd not seen before. The one point I don't like is related to the idea a fatal projectile came through the deck or upper hull armor. The analysis showing a fatal penetration just below the side armor belt is as folks say extremely low odds, but it does exp[lain a lot. It also dovetails with the machinery malfunction. Were a lower hull penetration to occur in the aft hull then the machinery malfunction waives away the need to such a projectile path to lead to a magazine. Rather the projectile detonates near the shaft compartment, triggering a shaft failure & the resulting fire in the one or more aft magazines.
 
Last edited:
If that shell was going to explode it would have done so when it hit the sea and the only reason it struck POW at all was because it did not.
Many ships have been hit below the waterline by shells that did explode. Shots under the armored belt were always a consideration in the armored scheme of ships.
 
Honestly I do wonder how Denmark Straight would have shaped out if Holland had kept his six destroyers along with Norfolk and Suffolk in company with his capital ships. Certainly would have added a lot of complications to the Germans.
I think Holland sent his destroyers away because he couldn't keep them fueled up.
 
Honestly I do wonder how Denmark Straight would have shaped out if Holland had kept his six destroyers along with Norfolk and Suffolk in company with his capital ships. Certainly would have added a lot of complications to the Germans.
Suffolk lost contact with Bismarck (due to a radar flaw) at around 0:30.

Holland's plan was to encounters Bismarck at its preferred angle (closing head on) and would have 6 destroyers present at approx 02:00 with Bismarck and Prinz Eugene silhouetted and Hood, POW and destroyers approach from darkness.

Holland detached his destroyers when radar contact was lost and they were out of position (he sent them north while Hood and POW went South South West)

Bismarck's and Prinz Eugene changed course at 01.41. Had the British known and adjusted they would have been able to make contact more or less as planned. Instead they didn't know until Suffolk restablished radar contact around 03:00.

What if Norfolk had radar (or what if Suffolk's radar didn't fail) is a great what it.

I don't think that the destroyers would have been the most effective. The sea state in Denmark strait was rough. That said 6 destroyers can put 50 torpedoes in the water. 1-2 could be decisive when Bismarck is already struggling with a gun battle with a pair of battleships so not very effective could merely be in relative terms.
 
Last edited:
Even if HMS Hood has to flood her aft magazine, which is the only way I can see her not conflagrating. She will still engage with her forward 15 inch guns and Bismarck will either be sunk or crippled before the battle ends.
Bit of a long stretch there IMHO and to say that with such blithe confidence is unfounded given the situation at that stage of the battle. Hood loses the after turrets and POW with problematic main armament. The damage is in the very first few moments of the action and the longer the exchange continues the more damage would result to both sides, particularly against the older design. Sure, Bismarck would accrue damage as well, but to assume that the resulting British victory is inevitable with that damage is a bit of hubris, I think. I'd more likely believe that both sides break off the action at some point, and Bismarck having suffered whatever damage accrues from the exchange is more likely to attempt to withdraw back to Norway. T
 
Honestly I do wonder how Denmark Straight would have shaped out if Holland had kept his six destroyers along with Norfolk and Suffolk in company with his capital ships. Certainly would have added a lot of complications to the Germans.
The range restriction of the German destroyers severely limited there utility for any extended deployment.
 
Many ships have been hit below the waterline by shells that did explode. Shots under the armored belt were always a consideration in the armored scheme of ships.

Certainly but in this case it did not

I’m working so cannot share the damage report etc but that shell hit very low down (any lower and it would have gone under the ship).

**Edit link here

It would have travelled through a relatively long distance underwater, had tumbled and deformed along the way and embedded itself in the hull backwards.

If it was going to explode it would have done so long before hitting POW.

Part of the protection considerations of an armoured scheme for the belt is that the water itself vs a shell will protect the ship which is why the belt would thin lower down before ending altogether.

The was another hit from PE that was an under belt hit near the aft magazines which is of perhaps greater concern!

I know the IJN spent considerable effort in trying to get shells to perform like a torpedo to achieve such an under belt hit but IIRC failed to get this idea to work.
 
Last edited:
Top