Damage to Bismarck's catapault

Gerard Heimann · Post by **Gerard Heimann** » Fri Mar 21, 2008 6:55 pm

I don't see any motivation for Mr. Rzonca to tell anything but the truth here. What he said is believable and probably reflects the prevailing conditions. If there was extended and leisurely time to effect repairs perhaps something could have been done, but that was not the case.

I don't recall where they jettisoned the plane in relation to the final battle but if I could make it happen by wishing, I wish that the plane would have been located in the debris field.

30knots · Post by **30knots** » Fri Mar 21, 2008 10:47 pm

Jose,

Thanks very much for that. I hadn't read that interview with Bruno Rzonca before as well. Quite something.

Gerard,

Seems to me the plane was jettisoned well before the final battle (don't know much about this), hence it wouldn't be anywhere near the debris field of the sinking, assuming that's what you meant. The Cameron video of the wreck shows an aircraft still in one of the hangers though. (AFAIK Bismarck had 4) Why not jettison them all then?

These compressors ran a lot of equipment including the four big turrets.

Can't imagine air compressors 'ran' the main turrets, although i could believe some service air was used to each for various supporting purposes. Might be wrong though.

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Fri Mar 21, 2008 11:42 pm

I agree, phnumatic is the last thing I would expect to rotate a 1,000 ton turret. I thought it was electric or hydrolic or something like that?

tommy303 · Post by **tommy303** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 12:36 am

The gun run-out which returned the gun to battery position following recoil was pneumatic. Except for some electrically powered auxiliaries in the turrets, most main functions--elevation, training, and primary hoists-- were hydraulic.

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 12:58 am

That sounds better, pnumatic just isn't strong enough to rotate a 1,000 ton turret.

Bgile · Post by **Bgile** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 2:22 pm

The US uses compressed air to clear the gun tube of propellant gasses after firing. It's a bit amusing to watch. There is this huge ball of smoke and flame, and as it is clears and the gun is returning to loading angle, you see this little puff of white smoke come out of the barrel.

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 5:18 pm

Cool, I am asuming you are talking about the mk45? What ship did you serve on?

Bgile · Post by **Bgile** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 6:35 pm

Ramius wrote: Cool, I am asuming you are talking about the mk45? What ship did you serve on?

I was in submarines. I was referring to the 16" gun. I've only seen it fired in films.

Bgile · Post by **Bgile** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 6:38 pm

I wonder if the failure to check the catapault after the first engagement had anything to do with the Luftwaffe / Kreigsmarine situation where the lines of responsibility might have been fuzzy.

Ramius · Post by **Ramius** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 9:47 pm

You are kidding me right? Something like that screwing up the capabilities of their ship, I don't think Hitler would have had any of it if he heard about this

I'm sure heads would roll if something stupid like that was happening in the USN

30knots · Post by **30knots** » Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:43 pm

The gun run-out which returned the gun to battery position following recoil was pneumatic.

Now thats something i didn't know.