Bismarck - magazine protection, funnel uptake question

Discussions about the history of the ship, technical details, etc.

Moderator: Bill Jurens

alecsandros
Senior Member
Posts: 4349
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Bismarck - magazine protection, funnel uptake question

Post by alecsandros »

HEllo,

Looking more into the plans, I found 2 other things that I don't have answers for:

1) did Bismarck have extra magazine protection ?
From the plans, I can see the vertical protection consists of the 320mm main belt + 120mm inclined portion of panzer deck + armored bulkhead (45mm below the scarp, 30mm above it). The horizontal protection appears to be 100mm Wh.
My question : did the walls of the main magazines have extra armor ? Some splinter armor perhaps ?

2) How were the funnell uptakes protected from damage ?
As far as I can see, above the panzer deck there are 5 x 2 uptakes that transfer smoke from the boiler rooms to the funnell above. They were located in the sections XI, XII and XIII, spanning about 30m in length, 15 in width and some 5 meters in height.

Now, those uptakes had only citadel protection (145mm KC n/A + 30mm transverse Wh bulkhead).
This is not enough to stop heavy gunfire.

In the event of a battle, a single shell explosion exactly in the center of the funnel uptakes would destroy them all, leaving the boiler rooms unable to evacuate smoke (in fact, they could evacuate it, but it would be inside the ship)

This would almost certainly lead to drastic speed reduction and death.

What am I missing ?
Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 922
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: Bismarck - magazine protection, funnel uptake question

Post by Thorsten Wahl »

In general all bulkheadplates around the magazines had somwhat increased thickness by about 7 or 8 mm. So if a certain bulkhead has 12 mm thickness according Bauvorschrift - if a magazine is behind this bulkhead thickness is increased to ~20mm
Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!
User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1585
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Bismarck - magazine protection, funnel uptake question

Post by Herr Nilsson »

Thorsten Wahl wrote:In general all bulkheadplates around the magazines had somwhat increased thickness by about 7 or 8 mm. So if a certain bulkhead has 12 mm thickness according Bauvorschrift - if a magazine is behind this bulkhead thickness is increased to ~20mm
Because the specification of the hull tells something different at first glance, I'm desperately trying to verify this. Please, could you give me a tip where I have to look?

Hi Thorsten,

in der BBV steht doch, dass die Munitionskammerschotte wie die angrenzenden Hauptquer- und Seitenlängsschotte zu bauen sind. Unter dem Panzerdeck ist ein 60 cm hoher und 12 mm dicker Streifen von Torpedoschott zu Torpedoschott einzubauen. Davon ausgenommen sind nur die verstärkten Dockschotte sowie die Turmtrageschotte. Munitionskammerschotte werden mit keinem Wort erwähnt. Übersehe ich was?
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)
Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 922
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: Bismarck - magazine protection, funnel uptake question

Post by Thorsten Wahl »

In the Bauvorschrift ther is a simple statment thicknesses according to drawings.

I stumbled over it some days ago, when I read some new stuff(for me). Unfortunately I did not notice the reference document as I was suprised and chip were it is stored is now defective.
maybe
Kriegserfahrungen Tirpitz Oberbaurat Krux, or
Schiffskunde Tirpitz
Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!
User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1585
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Bismarck - magazine protection, funnel uptake question

Post by Herr Nilsson »

Thank you, I will check it this evening.
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)
Thorsten Wahl
Senior Member
Posts: 922
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:17 pm

Re: Bismarck - magazine protection, funnel uptake question

Post by Thorsten Wahl »

Ifound the statement in USNTME Technical Report No. 224-45 Latest German Battleships put into Service - Bismarck - Tirpitz Hull Construction

but the increase in thickness was only at the upper platformdeck
Attachments
Munitionkammer1.jpg
Munitionkammer1.jpg (23.3 KiB) Viewed 2128 times
Meine Herren, es kann ein siebenjähriger, es kann ein dreißigjähriger Krieg werden – und wehe dem, der zuerst die Lunte in das Pulverfaß schleudert!
User avatar
Herr Nilsson
Senior Member
Posts: 1585
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Germany

Re: Bismarck - magazine protection, funnel uptake question

Post by Herr Nilsson »

Thank you !Now I understand. But this refers only to the deck itself not to the walls and it wasn't made to increase the magazine protection. The reason to strengthen the upper platform deck was to prevent deflection of the deck in two different cases:
-Full powder room and lift winch of the shell room loaded
-Almost empty powder room and water pressure in a flooded shell room
Regards

Marc

"Thank God we blow up and sink more easily." (unknown officer from HMS Norfolk)
Post Reply