Photos of ships sinking

Naval photographers post your photos here. Warship tours, mistery ships, quizzes, etc.
Ramius
Member
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:40 am
Location: Richmond, Virginia

Post by Ramius » Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:21 pm

:clap: There are some very interesting pictures above.
Image
Here is the British liner Andex in the Atlantic.

Ramius
Member
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:40 am
Location: Richmond, Virginia

Post by Ramius » Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:25 pm

Here is HMS couraqgous sunk by U-29
Image

Ramius
Member
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:40 am
Location: Richmond, Virginia

Post by Ramius » Thu Apr 03, 2008 8:28 pm

Here is HMS Ark Royal (after U-Boats have revenge on her for Bismarck :lol: )
Image
Image

User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Post by paulcadogan » Fri Apr 04, 2008 5:38 am

Your Ark Royal post is a repeat Ramius - though your pix are clearer.

Here's the death of the Italian battleship Roma in 1943 thanks to a German glider bomb which penetrated a magazine....

Image

Image

Image

Image
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man

User avatar
Antonio Bonomi
Senior Member
Posts: 3482
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 10:44 am
Location: Vimercate ( Milano ) - Italy

Roma sinking

Post by Antonio Bonomi » Fri Apr 04, 2008 7:00 am

Ciao Paul and all,

very god selection Paul, I knew that sooner or later somebody was going to publish those photos :wink: .

From the pics everybody can easily notice one thing : after the German bomb penetrated the deck behind B turret, exploding into the main charge magazines ( photo 1 and 2 ) , the B triple 380 mm gun turret itself went away and in fact it is missing ( on photo 3 ) from the barbette that now is a empty hole.

But the ship hull herself is still intact as the deflagration of the main charges caused the turret to blow away, but did not damage immediately the hull structure.

Something like this occurred on Tirpitz after the Tallboy hit that similarly caused a main turret to blow away in Tromso due to main charges deflagration, even if 70 meters of her port side were detached by the 3 Tallboy bomb detonation on port side.

So, a very good and solid construction apparently, as Roma broke on 2 pieces sinking only after capsizing ( photo 4 ).

Barham and Hood for example differently went into pieces immediately after a main magazine explosion (main charges deflagration ) ...... :think: :think:

Ciao Antonio :D

dougieo
Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 12:36 am
Location: Scotland

Re: Roma sinking

Post by dougieo » Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:33 pm

Antonio Bonomi wrote:Ciao Paul and all,

very god selection Paul, I knew that sooner or later somebody was going to publish those photos :wink: .

From the pics everybody can easily notice one thing : after the German bomb penetrated the deck behind B turret, exploding into the main charge magazines ( photo 1 and 2 ) , the B triple 380 mm gun turret itself went away and in fact it is missing ( on photo 3 ) from the barbette that now is a empty hole.

But the ship hull herself is still intact as the deflagration of the main charges caused the turret to blow away, but did not damage immediately the hull structure.

Something like this occurred on Tirpitz after the Tallboy hit that similarly caused a main turret to blow away in Tromso due to main charges deflagration, even if 70 meters of her port side were detached by the 3 Tallboy bomb detonation on port side.

So, a very good and solid construction apparently, as Roma broke on 2 pieces sinking only after capsizing ( photo 4 ).

Barham and Hood for example differently went into pieces immediately after a main magazine explosion (main charges deflagration ) ...... :think: :think:

Ciao Antonio :D

anything to do with the age of the ships and building methods used?

Barham was on her side at the time as well if that makes a difference

Ramius
Member
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:40 am
Location: Richmond, Virginia

Post by Ramius » Fri Apr 04, 2008 5:06 pm

:shock: Yes, that is very interesting, it does seem that turret B has been ejected (or just blown to kingdom come)...

User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Post by paulcadogan » Fri Apr 04, 2008 9:09 pm

I wonder how the KGV's would have stood up to a magazine explosion?? :think:

Anyway, on with the photos! Now Operation Juno - the Glorious:

Image

And the Acasta (on the right I think)

Image


And as an extra - Scharnhorts's torpedo damage:

Image
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man

Ramius
Member
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:40 am
Location: Richmond, Virginia

Post by Ramius » Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:02 pm

:think: Is the damage in front of the shaft entrance point? With that kind of shaft damage I would think the odometer (it's the odometer that shows rpm, right?) would go strait to zero.

By the way, nice photos :clap:

User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Post by paulcadogan » Sat Apr 05, 2008 4:34 am

Thanks Ramius! You're doing a pretty good job yourself! :clap:

No, the odometer in a car measures your mileage!

Here's a close-up I found of Scharnhorst's hull:

Image

The damage was very serious, flooding her with 2,500 tons of sea water, knocking C-turret out of action (it's magazines were flooded) and killing 48 men. Her speed fell only slightly initially to 26 knots, but as
the flooding increased her starboard engine stopped and even her middle propeller threatened to stop. Eventually, after the battle was over she was down to 21.5 knots.

It is amazing the fight the two British destroyers Ardent and Acasta put up to defend the Glorious with their little 4.7-inch guns and torpedoes. Both scored shell hits on Scharnhorst, though only Acasta's torpedo caused serious damage.

It is also amazing that the German victory led to the downfall of Admiral Marschall. He had not completed his mission and had gotten Scharnhorst badly damaged in the process - it did not matter that he had deprived the British of a valuable aircraft carrier. Once again...NO UNNECESSARY RISKS!

Then while escorting Scharnhorst home, Gneisenau was torpedoed by the submarine Clyde so both German battleships were out of action.

Paul
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man

User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Post by paulcadogan » Sat Apr 05, 2008 5:05 am

Now some US carriers:

Hornet at the Battle of Santa Cruz, 1942:

Image

The Yorktown at the Battle of Midway:

Image

And how she looks on the bottom:

Image
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man

Ramius
Member
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:40 am
Location: Richmond, Virginia

Post by Ramius » Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:27 pm

:wink: I love Bob Ballard! Without him we would not have Titanic, Bismarck, Yorktown, and many others!

Paul,
Very nice closeup! That really shows how serious the damage was. A toast to the designers and builders of the Twins. Now the questions:
1. :shock: How big was the torpedo? Looks like Zeus came down and decided to Tango with Scharnhorst!

2. :think: How come the top of the hole is completely straight to my eyes? Is that repair work, or is that where the vertical armor begins?

And again nice work everyone, these are great pictures we are bringing to light. Some twit in high school or college is probably drooling over these for his History project!!! :lol:

User avatar
Terje Langoy
Supporter
Posts: 435
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:15 pm
Location: Bergen, Norway

Post by Terje Langoy » Sun Apr 06, 2008 10:25 am

Nice posting about the Scharnhorst, Paul. I've got a few comments though. A renowned naval author (MJ Whitley) made a rather interesting comment in a book of his. Though the comment was more of a question I think it holds a certain value. He attempted to view Marschall's change of command as not being based upon a single sortie but of his command as a total. I can easily imagine him disagreeing a lot with Admiral Raeder in operational matters. His predeccesor, Admiral Böhm, had also disagreed. The latter commanded one single mission before being replaced. Point is that the Juno sortie could have been the trigger that would prompt the change of command but it does not have to make the entire case. Böhm was replaced due to divergence of opinions, could Marschall have experienced the very same?

As far as I know, the Gneisenau was actually heading in another direction than the Scharnhorst when she was torpedoed. She was not escorting the Scharnhorst but attempting to make a sweep into the GIUK gap and thus create a diversion for the Scharnhorst returning home. She had passed Frohavet when she was torpedoed and meanwhile Scharnhorst would actually be passing through Ytrefjord, past Gripholm and then due south, not west.

Btw Ramius, I would appreciate if you could restrain for using words such as twit. Call me old-fashioned but a certain sense of respect ought to be maintained at all times. A lot of people, not necessarily members of the forum, might read these postings and thus they might get the wrong impression.

User avatar
paulcadogan
Senior Member
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 4:03 am
Location: Kingston, Jamaica

Post by paulcadogan » Sun Apr 06, 2008 4:27 pm

Thanks for the correction Terje. I'm sure you're right too about Juno being used as the "last straw" against Marschall. In Cajus Bekker's "Hitler's Naval War" it is explained how nothing official was said directly to him, it was through the grapevine so to speak and he was not permitted to defend himself. He then reported himself sick, after which Raeder transfered command to Lutjens. He did eventually write a report in his defence, but was again rebuffed by Raeder, again through a third party, whose "main point" was that "as an operational commander he was, generally speaking, a failure"!

And now, a tale of two Bluechers: Just look at history repeating itself, this one is eerie!

WW1 armoured cruiser Bluecher capsizing at the Battle of Dogger Bank 1915:

Image

And WW2 heavy cruiser Bluecher capsizing in the Drobak Narrows, Norway, 1940:

Image

Amazing similarity isn't it! :think:
Qui invidet minor est - He who envies is the lesser man

Ramius
Member
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 3:40 am
Location: Richmond, Virginia

Post by Ramius » Sun Apr 06, 2008 4:29 pm

:? Sorry, that was more a pun at myself than anything.

Does anyone have good pictures of Tirpitz?

Post Reply