Naval History Forums

After the scuttling of Graf Spee Reader issued a directive on December 22nd 1939:

The German warship has to fight with the full commitment of his crew until the last grenade, until it wins or goes down with a waving flag.

So Langsdorff made it virtually impossible for Lütjens to surrender.

"Schlachtschiff Bismarck – Das wahre Gesicht eines Schiffes" Teil 2 , page 273

Paul, as said before it's implausible that the rudders were visible. If there would have been an account about still turning propellers and damaged or undamaged rudders, it would have come from Junack, because he was responsible for the turbines and he was first damage control officer until shortly ...

I have some problems with Kuhnt's purported account: Firstly, how is it possible that Kuhnt could see the rudders at all. Bismarck was down by the stern and low in the water. I would assume that the rudders couldn't rise above the water anymore. Secondly, aside from narrations of Kuhnt in several bo...

1428B/25 From C.N.S. to RODNEY My 1158B/25. Comply with C. in C. Home Fleet 1047/25 acting on the assumption that enemy is proceeding to Norway via passage between Scotland and Iceland. ... 1621/25 From C. in C. Home Fleet to Admiralty My position 054º 50' N., 033º 20' W., at 1600B, course 80º, spe...

One thing being ignored here, or at least minimized, is the rather dramatic effect of propeller efficiency. Especially if one is running close to the cavitation limit, which Bismarck would almost certainly have been during high-speed trials, even a small defect in blade geometry can affect the spee...

According to Evers‘ „Kriegsschiffbau“, 1943: He says the German navy used the term „Deplacement“ as a volume or weight. If it‘s a weight, it’s calculated by using a density of 1,015. He also says it‘s the average density of the Baltic. The same density is mentioned for the Baltic in „Leitfaden für d...

Fellow Contributors, I assume because of the density of the water. Exactly. As was raised but largely ignored before, the Baltic is nearly freshwater, less dense than oceanic water, so while Bismarck may have been immersed as if she were at operational displacement 47,900 m3 = 49,100 mt in seawater...

I assume because of the density of the water.

@Alberto .... countering your wrong statement that all maps are similar etc., therefore I have to conclude that you have no more argument... I've said most, not all. So said, if you have nothing to add to this discussion, please "dispense" me with your word games, mocking and insinuations about "hon...

On the one hand it seems to be unwanted that Antonio's work was possibly adopted (IMHO a little far fetched) on the other hand it is criticised that it wasn't used. ??? I mean, if I were Antonio, I would be very happy, that my old, wrong, flawed, obsolete map was possibly used (having a much newer, ...

Hello Paul, although we knew the speed and the SHP's, we never had an idea at what draft/displacement. It was assumed that Bismarck made her speed in very light condition, because 8.65 meters (using 8.5 and 8.8 as meter values) is almost "empty ship". Knowing the calculation rule, now we know that B...

Hello Alberto, I don't think so. The main issue is that most maps including Antonio's are based on tracks from official reports (except Bismarck's). Therefore most maps are looking very similar at first glance. However, a closer look reveals that both Hood's and PoW's tracks are not the same like in...

.... Of course, I'm sure that, unlike Mr.Toussaint, the authors have preventively obtained Antonio's permission to use his material, even if I have been a bit disappointed for being unable to find myself any (well due) explicit acknowledgement to his 2005 map, at least at first glance.... ... Anton...