Bismarck Myths
Posted: Mon Dec 13, 2004 1:40 pm
This topic has been moved here from the old forum. Feel free to continue the discussion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26 Nov 2003 02:30:01 - Dave Saxton
As Bismarck is perhaps the second most famous ship in history, I guess that it's only natural a great deal mythology surounds it. On one hand Bismarck is sometimes desribed in terms of some kind of mythical tutonic god in Krupp steel. We are to believe that Bismarck can take superior numbers of contemporaries and always come out the winner. On the other hand, I see common ideas about specific technical aspects of the design, that have been traditionally put forth, continually and perpetually espoused to the point that these common views have become myths themselves. Let's look at a few of these myths in no particular order of importance.
Myth: Bismarck was designed to fight primarly only at shorter ranges and it's protection scheme wasn't viable at longer ranges. It's a fact that the order put out by the Kriegsmarine called for a designed IZ from 20km-30km. That's long range. Moreover, this isn't just a theoretical protection principle mistakenly thought viable by an inexperianced and confused design team. The principles actually were put to the test in trial shoots by 15" guns at long range and found to be viable.
Myth: Bismarck's 15-inch guns had poor deck penetration. Poor compared to what? Yamato's 18.1-inch gun? In fact the German 15-inch gun had deck penetration performance more or less the same as the other 15-inch guns.
Myth: Bismarck's high velocity 15-inch guns were less accurate than other guns with lower MV. In fact dispersion is not a function of MV, although it can be a relation- multipling the effects of inconsistant charges, inconsitant shell weights, poor flight dynamics, poor areodynamics...ect. In the case of German guns many British combat accounts mention impressive German salvo patterns.
Myth: The German 15-inch projectiles were faulty compared to other battleship projectiles of the era. Dud's were a fact of life with the projectiles of all navies during the battleship era. Everyone had similar problems. Moreover, it's a fact that Krupp designed fuzes for AP rounds, were normally intended to not go off unless noticable armor was encountered.
Myth: The underwater protection sytems were backward in principle, and generaly inferior to those used on other contemporary designs. Actually torpedo defense systems by everone were never a guarantee and usually didn't perform as well as hoped. In fact the Germans never expected their systems to be able to withstand something unrealistic, like a 1,000 lb high expolisive warhead, but it did actually do better than they expected in the tests. Moreover, Bismarck's wreck just doesn't show the massive breachs of the system we had been led to expect.
Myth: Bismarck is riddled with faulty welding and is bound to fall apart if exposed to structral damage. Inflicted structral stress and damage will cause any battleship to show structral failures. Welding is a science without guarantees against failure, and everone had problems during the WWII era. Remember weld failures on occasion can and do happen even the 21st century. In fact the German warships probably had a greater probability of avoiding failed welds than most other welded warships of the era, due to the greater weldabilty of the materials and the earlier German understanding of hydrogen embrittlement potential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 Nov 2003 19:35:18 - Brian
While the points you have given are basically correct, there are other myths that need to be addressed too:
Myth: Bismarck was the most powerful battleship ever.
Myth: Bismarck could have taken any two other battleships in the world.
Myth: Bismarck was unsinkable!
Etc, etc.
The Bismarck wasn't a faliure like some people state, she was probably the finest vessel at the time she sailed, but she has been overrated too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26 Nov 2003 02:30:01 - Dave Saxton
As Bismarck is perhaps the second most famous ship in history, I guess that it's only natural a great deal mythology surounds it. On one hand Bismarck is sometimes desribed in terms of some kind of mythical tutonic god in Krupp steel. We are to believe that Bismarck can take superior numbers of contemporaries and always come out the winner. On the other hand, I see common ideas about specific technical aspects of the design, that have been traditionally put forth, continually and perpetually espoused to the point that these common views have become myths themselves. Let's look at a few of these myths in no particular order of importance.
Myth: Bismarck was designed to fight primarly only at shorter ranges and it's protection scheme wasn't viable at longer ranges. It's a fact that the order put out by the Kriegsmarine called for a designed IZ from 20km-30km. That's long range. Moreover, this isn't just a theoretical protection principle mistakenly thought viable by an inexperianced and confused design team. The principles actually were put to the test in trial shoots by 15" guns at long range and found to be viable.
Myth: Bismarck's 15-inch guns had poor deck penetration. Poor compared to what? Yamato's 18.1-inch gun? In fact the German 15-inch gun had deck penetration performance more or less the same as the other 15-inch guns.
Myth: Bismarck's high velocity 15-inch guns were less accurate than other guns with lower MV. In fact dispersion is not a function of MV, although it can be a relation- multipling the effects of inconsistant charges, inconsitant shell weights, poor flight dynamics, poor areodynamics...ect. In the case of German guns many British combat accounts mention impressive German salvo patterns.
Myth: The German 15-inch projectiles were faulty compared to other battleship projectiles of the era. Dud's were a fact of life with the projectiles of all navies during the battleship era. Everyone had similar problems. Moreover, it's a fact that Krupp designed fuzes for AP rounds, were normally intended to not go off unless noticable armor was encountered.
Myth: The underwater protection sytems were backward in principle, and generaly inferior to those used on other contemporary designs. Actually torpedo defense systems by everone were never a guarantee and usually didn't perform as well as hoped. In fact the Germans never expected their systems to be able to withstand something unrealistic, like a 1,000 lb high expolisive warhead, but it did actually do better than they expected in the tests. Moreover, Bismarck's wreck just doesn't show the massive breachs of the system we had been led to expect.
Myth: Bismarck is riddled with faulty welding and is bound to fall apart if exposed to structral damage. Inflicted structral stress and damage will cause any battleship to show structral failures. Welding is a science without guarantees against failure, and everone had problems during the WWII era. Remember weld failures on occasion can and do happen even the 21st century. In fact the German warships probably had a greater probability of avoiding failed welds than most other welded warships of the era, due to the greater weldabilty of the materials and the earlier German understanding of hydrogen embrittlement potential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 Nov 2003 19:35:18 - Brian
While the points you have given are basically correct, there are other myths that need to be addressed too:
Myth: Bismarck was the most powerful battleship ever.
Myth: Bismarck could have taken any two other battleships in the world.
Myth: Bismarck was unsinkable!
Etc, etc.
The Bismarck wasn't a faliure like some people state, she was probably the finest vessel at the time she sailed, but she has been overrated too.