Naval History Forums

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...

@Marcelo Not exactly: there aren't all 13 bars, but a just couple of bars in the relevant area around the waterline, which indicated the distance over keel. Furthermore your sequence of calculation differs from the original one. You first read the decimeters of the waterline and add it to the decime...

@José 8,8/4 = 98,8 dm = 9,88 m @Marcelo Well, it was called "getarnte Tiefgangsmeldung" (masked draft message). Without the height of the highest bar above keel and the calculation rule the values are quite worthless. IMHO it should prevent that any unauthorized reader (or even authorized bearer) of...

As some members might remember there is the riddle of the very cryptic draft measurements during Bismarck’s trial runs, fall 1940. speedtrial29.jpg We have discussed it at one time or another: http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1828&p=21066 http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.ph...

From the original operation instructions (my collection):

SMS Kaiser:
SMS Bayern (just two turbine rooms shown):
In comparison:
SMS Moltke:

@ Thorsten

Almost, BS 30.05 kn and TP 30.15 kn.

Scharnhorst's and Tirpitz' turbines were of similar design, but Bismarck's was very different. According their manuals Scharnhorst and Tirpitz had a very similar (almost identical) steam consumption per SHP You meant the consumption drawings in Kriegserfahrungen...Oberbaurat Krux? Power RPM ....ste...

What are you looking for exactly?

Hello everybody, Thorsten Wahl wrote: "Bismarcks machinery was more sturdy, the complete steam piping was much better shock protected." Hi, Thorsten, thanks for your answer to my question. From what you write, I understand that the power plants were the same in terms of boilers and turbines, just m...

It seems to me, that there is some confusion in secondary sources. 58 atü (kg/cm^2) was the working pressure at 450° on Bismarck and Tirpitz and obviously the same on Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. For 125000 SHP Scharnhorst needed 12 boilers at 42 atü and for more than 160000 SHP 12 boilers at 56 atü....