Naval History Forums

Tiornu wrote: Except that it's only 80mm thick, some of which is vertical.

So your disregarding the upper armoured deck completely?

David, I have sent you a forum e-mail.

Every source I've been able to find indicates that she would not have had a blind fire capability. That's why I said over 25,000 yards. Interpolating based on the data at navweapons yields about 26,500 to penetrate 110mm. I know most readily available sources don't indicate this, but the standard i...

Oops, I made a mistake. I was using the 28cm/52 angle of fall, that is quite a bit steeper. The 28cm/54's deck penetration at 30,000 yards is only about 95mm.

The Alaska's were not completed before 1944. By late 1943 Scharnhorst had some upgraded, and quite capable, radars as well. According to Gkdos100 curves, the Scharnhorst's 28cm/54 deck penetration is about 120mm at around 28km (~30 ky) range. The Scharnhorst's deck protection certainly exceeded 102m...

The point here is that a shell can hit under water (and impact below the belt) at long or medium range but at close range the flat trajectory will result in the a short bouncing of the water as happened when the Rodney and KGV were trying to finish off the Bismarck. I didn't say the shallow belt ma...

Hi RF, I kind of suspect that the Germans were not aware. Anything involving radar during this time frame was super secret, regardless of nation. In most cases there was no thought of sharing things with others. The German Navy had even tried to keep it secret from the Luftwaffe. The Tizard Mission ...

The 16"/45 does have inferior belt penetration using the 2700lb projectile as compared to the 2240 lb projectile as most models show. At 5,000 yards the difference in striking angle is negligible. Over the more pratical short and medium ranges the srtiking angle vs belts is more favorable with ...

The thing that intrigues me about using the 2240lb shell with the 16"/50, is that the MV could be 2650 f/s or more. A trade off of speed at the expense of weight is better than trading speed for weight. The velocity componant of kenetic energy is squared and the weight is not. Additionally, the...

Going back to the KGV vs Bismarck or Tirpitz arguement, I still think that a KGV would win, especially later in the war when more efficent radar fire control would result in longer engagement ranges. At these ranges the Bismark or Tirpitz is particularly vulnerable to plunging fire, and the KGV doe...

I don't know. I doubt it though. At any rate the French were many years behind the Germans in radar development and capability.

Hi David, The increased angle of departure of the modernized and MKII 15"/42 increased the typical range attained. The Hood already had an elevation of 30* from the start, giving it a range of 29,000 yards using the 4crh shell. On the unmodernized battleship mountings the range was 24,000 yards...

David, The Nelson class 16"/45 had bore erosion problems originally, so the charge was reduced. This lowered the MV and reduced the power of the gun. The rational for using a shorter shell in the British case, was originally to increase the probability of intact penetration. Additionally, the B...

The above penetration for the German 15" is from the Krupp red curves. There is little question as to their validity. One must be careful to know what the diffinition of penetration is. It could be for just a hole made, a partial penetration, penetration but the shell breaks, and penetration in...

The Tirpitz sum deck armour thickness was 5.1" over the machinery, and 7.1" over the magazines. 0.8 inches D Steel will not de-cap large caliber shells. The difference between the penetrating power of the new breed of 15" guns and the British 14"-15" is not really that small...