Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.
User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1095
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby paulcadogan » Sun Jul 08, 2012 11:34 pm

The fact is tha we know now, from careful reading of PE's KTB, that she was not firing at Hood when she blew up but had switched fire to PoW on Lutjen's orders at least 2 minutes earlier.

steffen19k wrote:I think a better question would be whether or not Hood's gun crews were bypassing the flash protection features and procedures to speed up time between salvos. Its been a documented case of British capital ships, dating all the way back to the loss of 3 battlecruisers at Dogger Bank.


That IS a good question, especially given that the Jutland report incriminating the stacking of cordite and abandonment of safety procedures was nixed by Jellicoe when he became First Sea Lord at the Admiralty. I believe that Barham was carrying extra ammo and charges outside of magazine protection when she blew up after capsizing, which could have contributed to that explosion. Whether or not that was the case with Hood will never be known (unless it's in some still "most secret" document that won't see the light of day for another 30 years!).

But that does not efface the fact that it was Bismarck's and only Bismarck's shells that were falling around Hood when she exploded, and it was Bismarck's shells that possessed the penetrating power to punch through Hood's armour and reach a magazine.
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man

pg55555
Member
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2012 10:12 am

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby pg55555 » Mon Jul 09, 2012 7:50 am

.

A few facts would help.

1: WW2 era cordite was VERY different from WW1 (it was "solventless" and much safer). Also note that the WW1 cordite had a particular problem wit poor quality control.

2: Hood had, since her building, the improved flash-tightness standards imposed because of Jutland - this would have stopped the idea of stacking spare charges (the same applied to Barham).

Lots of idiotic ideas about cordite (both WW1 and WW2) on the web.

.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7490
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby RF » Mon Jul 09, 2012 9:05 am

I think it needs to be repeated, as this little detail is frquently overlooked - at the time Hood blew up the Prinz Eugen was shooting at Prince of Wales and not Hood.

Prinz Eugen originally opened fire on Hood as the lead British ship, obtaining two hits that we know about. Then Lutjens ordered Brinckmann to shift fire on to the POW because while Bismarck was also shooting at Hood the POW was not up till then under any German fire. This order was executed immediately prior to Hood blowing up.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

Jagdboot
Junior Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 11:28 pm

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby Jagdboot » Sat Sep 08, 2012 12:33 am

Bismarck must have scored the fatal hit on Hood. She was first to make contact with the target. As mentioned earlier in the thred Prince Eugen did not claim the hit.

Jagdboot

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7490
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby RF » Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:24 am

Jagdboot wrote:Bismarck must have scored the fatal hit on Hood. She was first to make contact with the target. As mentioned earlier in the thred Prince Eugen did not claim the hit.
Jagdboot

But Prinz Eugen hit Hood before Bismarck.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

User avatar
RNfanDan
Supporter
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:06 pm
Location: USA

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby RNfanDan » Thu Sep 13, 2012 12:48 am

'twas I who sank it... :whistle:
Image

pg55555
Member
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2012 10:12 am

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby pg55555 » Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:48 am

.

What ?

With your bow and arrow, Cock Robin ?

.

User avatar
RNfanDan
Supporter
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 4:06 pm
Location: USA

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby RNfanDan » Thu Sep 13, 2012 1:25 pm

pg55555 wrote:What ?

With your bow and arrow, Cock Robin ?


No, but either of those two notions are only slightly less plausible, in my opinion, than a single 8" HE shellburst having caused the fatal explosion which sank HMS Hood.

This ground has been so heavily trodden through the decades, its soil is no longer arable.

:stubborn:
Image

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7490
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby RF » Thu Sep 13, 2012 5:42 pm

Agreed - the absolute proof of the matter is that the Eugen was shooting at the Prince of Wales when Hood blew up.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

Vic Dale
Senior Member
Posts: 903
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 7:53 pm

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby Vic Dale » Tue May 21, 2013 9:13 am

I tend to think that Prinz Eugen's (PG)shell which started the fire on the boat deck must have first struck Hood's after funnel, which may explain why it burst on or above the boat deck rather than passing through the deck and exploding beneath. The resulting fire was impressive but not fatal as far as the ship was concerned. To my mind, the only way PG could get a strike into Hood's after magazine was for a near miss to pass beneath the armour and through the soft shell plating. She got at least one such strike to enter PoW after Hood blew up. PG had shifted fire to PoW on Lutjens' orders before Hood took her fatal hit, as has been illustrated earlier, so she could not have struck the fatal blow.

It is my firm belief that it was a shell from Bismarck which did for Hood and given the relatively flat trajectory of Bismarck's high velocity shells, it is unlikely to have resulted from a turret strike or a strike on the belt or decks. Hood's armour fore and aft was equal to that of a Queen Elizabeth class and her armoured decks and that over the magazines would have been more than enough to defeat Bismarck's shells, because of the shallow angle of strike due to their flat trajectory. I am strongly of the belief that it was a wet strike to starboard causing the shell to pass beneath the armoured belt and directly into the after magazine. Bismarck took serious damage from a wet strike herself and it is fortunate that the strike was not in a magazine.

Degradable

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby Degradable » Fri Feb 26, 2016 8:40 am

All very interesting, but why should it have been a single she'll strike.
Consideration to fires on deck are very valid. Therefore the picture in "biography of battle cruiser..." show masses of 4" ammunition not even in the RUL.
Considering this trail of ammunition it is still plausible that the Torpedo cooked.
Ultimately a Torpedo storage going of would have broken her back exactly where she broke. Additionally it could lead as with Barham to secondary conflagration including 4" and 15" magazine.
This could better explain the lack of blast removing turrets and going directly up if a 15" was penetrated.

Ultimately though we do not and will probably never know. So as probable as Bismark, it is certainly possible that Torpedo could still be responsible. (Note DNC was largely ignored on this point.). This makes it possible that PE shell assisted if not actually caused the fire.
I would note that this is conjecture on my point and Tiger had a raging fire of similar scale at Dogger.

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7490
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby RF » Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:28 am

I would be interested to see what Bill Jurens would have to say about the above post, I would imagine that he would have had reason to exclude torpedo detonation as the trigger for Hood's demise.

Apart from that, at the time Hood blew the Prinz Eugen was shooting at POW and not Hood. Nether was there any visible fire observed on Hood in that area prior to Hood's demise.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 3990
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby alecsandros » Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:56 am

... The killing salvo was seen hitting and destroying Hood by eye wittnesses on Prince of Wales and on Bismarck.

IF the salvo coincided with another phenomenon occuring on Hood , it was a big coincidence. :think:

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 1727
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby Alberto Virtuani » Mon Feb 29, 2016 1:18 pm

From my very light knowledge of torpedoes detonation effects , I would say that torpedo warheads detonating outside water are very unlikely to broke the back of such a large ship and they can't penetrate the Hood armored decks (even if thin and not armor grade....).

Torpedo warheads (hard to detonate when not activated) can make fires worse on the upper decks and kill a lot of people but not sink the Hood (IMHO) as their devastating effect is due to the fact they are built to explode under water. Above the waterline, they would have dissipated most of their energy in the air.

Bye, Alberto
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition" (Adm.A.B.Cunningham)

User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7490
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?

Postby RF » Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:32 pm

alecsandros wrote:... The killing salvo was seen hitting and destroying Hood by eye wittnesses on Prince of Wales and on Bismarck.


Precisely. Only Bismarck could have fired that salvo.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.


Return to “Bismarck General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron