Naval History Forums

OpanaPointer wrote: ↑

Mon Nov 02, 2020 12:12 am

Once they got the laser guided bombs up and running it was over PDQ.

Yes, but I don't think they had those in WWII.

When you consider the bouncing bomb was going off in contact with the dam, several hundred feet down with all that water pressure adding to the effect ... kinda hard to beat that sort of thing in destructive power.

I think submarine stern planes work just the same as those on torpedoes. I've stood watches (a lot of them actually) on stern planes and "fairwater" planes so I know how it all works in practice, but not the technical hydrodynamics of it.

The surface would be wet in a perfectly straight line? I think it must be a plate overlap of some kind, if it isn't armor maybe just skin plating.

Do practice torpedoes have positive buoyancy, or does something happen at the end of the run to change buoyancy from negative to positive? It seems like running one at positive buoyancy would not be a proper test of it's combat performance.

If they had to maintain that speed during the battle would they have run out of fuel on the way home? That's a very good point Steve, I hadn't considered that one, do you think that in my scenario there was a hope in hell that Bismarck would survive? I don't think the odds are very good. The Britis...

The problem with penetrating armor into her engineering spaces was that it's very difficult to get underwater hits at close range. At low trajectories the shells tend to leave the water again after initially hitting it. Also, the Bismarck armor combination of belt and scarp is theoretically almost ...

The problem with penetrating armor into her engineering spaces was that it's very difficult to get underwater hits at close range. At low trajectories the shells tend to leave the water again after initially hitting it. Also, the Bismarck armor combination of belt and scarp is theoretically almost i...

If they had to maintain that speed during the battle would they have run out of fuel on the way home?

Being at periscope depth in heavy seas is difficult, especially when the planes are on the "sail". It's easy to lose depth control and broach.

But yes, if you can stay deep it's more comfortable. Unfortunately intelligence gathering often requires sticking masts out of the water.

So you think the Baron was lying when he said he was firing at KGV? Because if the ship was listing 40 deg it would not be possible to shoot at anything.

I think you still have the exhaustion factor in favor of the British. Anything can happen with battleship caliber shells flying around, but I think it's extremely unlikely the outcome would have been different.

I think it's pretty obvious that the US "Tin Clad" cruisers would not have been built but for the treaty limits, considering how inadequate their protection was. The British put 14" guns on the KGVs and the North Carolina class were designed with 14" guns. If you read one of Fischer's books which co...

Wadinga's post implies that Bismarck was completely incapable of fighting, and yet: She straddled Rodney early on, with one shell coming very close. The Baron in his book reports taking KGV under fire and straddling her. He had just ordered "good rapid" fire when his position was put out of action. ...

Thanks for the correction. The Germans took advantage of the other major naval powers adherence to the Washington treaty which limited cruiser guns to 8", and thereby created a ship which was militarily superior and was inferior only to ships about twice her size. It would probably have been advanta...