bismark-after torpedo hit

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

Moderator: Bill Jurens

User avatar
Alberto Virtuani
Senior Member
Posts: 3605
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:22 am
Location: Milan (Italy)

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by Alberto Virtuani »

Hello everybody,
Wadinga wrote: "This thread was about technical solutions"
...however it has been diverted from its topic, and not by me...


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

"There's always a danger running in the enemy at close range" (Adm.W.F.Wake-Walker)
Serigo
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:29 pm

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by Serigo »

Well, it’s true that Bismarck has a pretty much complicated situation after being struck by a torpedoe but it’s also true that for a big ship like Bismarck much more could have been done. Blow up the other rudder could have damaged the propellers and render the ship totally ungovernable, but that was just a possibility, the true is that by doing that the Bismarck at least could have a chance to scape from the situation, and the true is that Bismarck has obviously not chances to face the rn as full in specially with steering problems, so the real question is, ok, why it was not done at first place. If the result is making the ship ungovernable, that’s not important because by not trying anything the ship was already doomed. And to be honest, I truly believe that destroying the second rudder, the damaged sustained by the propellers wouldn’t make the ship ungovernable at all and in exchange , it could have good chances to scape, , b badly but still scape.

Another proposed option was to used the hangar door as an improvised rudder. And that would probably fix lithe situation, and historían are still wondering why they did not even try that option. It seems to me that German opsetion for perfectionist play a part in this and other possible option to try that night. Definitely more could have been. The question is not what could have been achieved by trying. The question is why they did not even tried as the ship was already domed.
Thank you
Bill Jurens
Moderator
Posts: 878
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:21 am
Location: USA

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by Bill Jurens »

Your observations are interesting ones, but are not -- at least in my opinion -- realistic.

First, there was almost certainly no possibility of 'blowing off' the port rudder, as it was probably gone already, removed by the torpedo hit on the starboard rudder. The port rudder was not, to my knowledge, found in the debris field slide scar, which suggests -- but admittedly only suggests -- that it was not there when the ship sank. I examined the failure point of the port rudder shaft from (literally) a meter or so away, and it appears that it snapped due to a massive near-instantaneous impulse, likely during the initial torpedo hit, although the effects of corrosion make it impossible to confirm this forensically. There remains a slim hope that the rudder may still be found on the bottom somewhere, which might enable details of the detachment determined, or at least clarified, via subsequent examination.

So far as the hangar door is concerned, it would have been, to say the least, a bit difficult to determine ahead of time exactly how such an item might be placed in order to achieve the desired effect, and -- even if that could have been done and some fixation points installed -- the ship would have had to have been stopped for some time while the door was positioned, and it is certainly debatable whether or not the arrangement -- however derived -- would have survived subsequent steaming, especially in the fairly heavy weather encountered on the 26th and 27th.

It's my opinion, but only that, that Bismarck was effectively doomed even if she had made the coast of France, as subsequent air attacks, commando raids, and the activities of the underground via sabotage, etc. would have made it possible to keep the ship in a more-or-less permanently disabled condition for the rest of the war, 'channel-dashes' aside. Tacticians may have decided that this sort of permanent-disablement strategy might have been better than simply sinking the ship outright insofar as continuing attempts at repairs might have been seen as an effective way to drain German resources from other more productive activities.

Bill Jurens
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by RF »

As an addendum to the final paragraph above there would also be the same fuel shortages that also kept Tirpitz largely port bound. Had Bismarck lasted to 1943 there would then be Hitlers' decision to scrap the large surface vessels and to use their guns as coastal batteries.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Serigo
Junior Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2021 3:29 pm

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by Serigo »

The point of my post is that, as the Bismarck was already doomed by doing nothing, they should have tried whatever available options.

About Bismarck steering problems, It’s obvious that at least one of the rudder was still operational, mean attach to the pope, otherwise the ship wouldn’t have steering problems. So blow it up. Could you please clearify if that’s true because otherwise I don’t know what was the steering problems come from.

The option of using the hangar door was proposed that night. Surprisingly nothing was done that night regardless the fact those options could have save the ship life.

You mentioned that even getting to France would not save the ship. I believe what we discussing here is what option could have been done that night after the hit , not what could have happened to the ship later in the war. We all know that Germany lost the war and therefore all German warship were doomed since that fact. But that something Germans and the rest of the world Unknown in may 1941.

Anyway I truly believe that in may 1941 the raf could not seriously threat the Bismarck integrity in France. Later in the war, probably. But not in may 1941. By getting to France Bismarck would most likely scape to Germany intact, after some provisional repairs, later in the year.

Thank you for your reply
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by RF »

The situation on the night of 26-27 May 1941 was a fairly rough sea, making diving operations very difficult if not impossible, and you also have to consider the state of the crew having been at action stations continuously for nearly three days. Add to this the attacks of Vian's destroyers. Neither would the Germans be aware of how low Tovey was on fuel.

What I think could have been done would have been an attempt to keep Bismarck pointed in the right direction - after the torpedo hit it appeared that the ship could be pointed south eastward but only for a short time before the rudder and rough seas turned Bismarck north westward. I wonder whether a sequence of telegraph orders could have been done to keep Bismarck pointing towards the French/Spanish coast, at even nine knots it takes Bismarck closer to safety and aggravates Tovey's fuel problem. To undertake such a sequence of telegraph orders would require a clear head and a fresh, alert mind, which given the state of the crew and senior officers would be lacking. But it could have been attempted?

The scenario if attempted could have placed Tovey in a situation where he would have insufficient fuel endurance to engage and sink Bismarck - and perhaps more likely have forced him to leave Rodney behind and try to catch up Bismarck using KGV's full speed, meaning KGV would have to engage Bismarck in a single ship action, with only Norfolk offering gun support. I think it would have been very difficult for KGV to sink Bismarck on its own, even with Bismarck in its crippled state.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
paul.mercer
Senior Member
Posts: 1224
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 10:25 pm

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by paul.mercer »

Hi RF,
That's a very good point although it would seem that after the torpedo hit and Lutyens statement to the crew that moral was not very good and according the the 'Baron' in his book moral was not very good on the bridge either.
Re leaving Rodney behind and KGV taking Bismarck on by herself, I think that the final action made it quite plain that sinking another well armoured battleship with shell fire alone was always going to be very difficult unless one went in the magazine. As Bismarck was unable to steer properly I would think that Bismark would have eventually bee battered into silence by a rain of 14" and either the Cruisers or the Swordfish waiting their chance to attack would have finished the job. even if Bismarck had managed to land a few hits on KGV. Once Bismarck was crippled she was as good as sunk, the RN were pulling in capital ships from everywhere so it was only a matter of time and Lutyens knew it.
HMSVF
Senior Member
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:15 am

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by HMSVF »

paul.mercer wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 10:51 am Hi RF,
That's a very good point although it would seem that after the torpedo hit and Lutyens statement to the crew that moral was not very good and according the the 'Baron' in his book moral was not very good on the bridge either.
Re leaving Rodney behind and KGV taking Bismarck on by herself, I think that the final action made it quite plain that sinking another well armoured battleship with shell fire alone was always going to be very difficult unless one went in the magazine. As Bismarck was unable to steer properly I would think that Bismark would have eventually bee battered into silence by a rain of 14" and either the Cruisers or the Swordfish waiting their chance to attack would have finished the job. even if Bismarck had managed to land a few hits on KGV. Once Bismarck was crippled she was as good as sunk, the RN were pulling in capital ships from everywhere so it was only a matter of time and Lutyens knew it.
Agree.

There is no way that Churchill would have let Bismarck get to France. As much for his own political survival.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by RF »

Churchill did have one factor that at that time would make him virtually fireproof - who do you replace him with?

The House of Commons censure debate after the fall of Tobruk in early 1942, designed covertly to push Churchill out, failed on that very point, even with by that time the USA in the war and not neutral (along with the Soviet Union) as it was in May 1941.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Bill Jurens
Moderator
Posts: 878
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:21 am
Location: USA

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by Bill Jurens »

Serigo wrote:
"About Bismarck steering problems, It’s obvious that at least one of the rudder was still operational, mean attach to the pope, otherwise the ship wouldn’t have steering problems. So blow it up. Could you please clearify if that’s true because otherwise I don’t know what was the steering problems come from."

I'd have to disagree. The port rudder was likely gone. The starboard rudder was hopelessly jammed in position, and half-missing. So no rudders were operational. Removing the port rudder wasn't necessary. Removing the starboard rudder was impossible, and even if it had been done would then have left the ship rudderless. Rudderless ships are, almost by definition, impossible to steer properly, which is why rudders were installed in the first place.

Bill Jurens
HMSVF
Senior Member
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2018 10:15 am

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by HMSVF »

Bill Jurens wrote: Fri Mar 19, 2021 11:53 pm Serigo wrote:
"About Bismarck steering problems, It’s obvious that at least one of the rudder was still operational, mean attach to the pope, otherwise the ship wouldn’t have steering problems. So blow it up. Could you please clearify if that’s true because otherwise I don’t know what was the steering problems come from."

I'd have to disagree. The port rudder was likely gone. The starboard rudder was hopelessly jammed in position, and half-missing. So no rudders were operational. Removing the port rudder wasn't necessary. Removing the starboard rudder was impossible, and even if it had been done would then have left the ship rudderless. Rudderless ships are, almost by definition, impossible to steer properly, which is why rudders were installed in the first place.

Bill Jurens

Hi Bill,

Wouldn't blowing of the rudders have risked blowing off an already weakened stern and whilst risking damage at least the centre screw? From the images I've seen the rudder looks like its been whacked with a giant hammer and bent right back.

Also how would they have blown it up? From inside? My understanding is that the water was surging in and out of the steering compartment. From outside? Surely you would have to get under the stern to achieve it? I don't know what the sea state was that day but seeing its the Atlantic I'm guessing it wasn't flat calm! The divers would probably be bashed against the underside of the hull,if they could survive that then they have the problem of attaching the explosive, ensuring that was rigged (and stayed rigged)
before getting back on board. Seems a very tall order to me.

The other thing is this. The crew of Bismarck would have known their ship inside out. They would know what was possible and not possible. My understanding was that they considered various solutions,but realised that none where feasible or could make things worse. They were also probably completely knackered mentally and physically.


Best wishes HMSVF
Bill Jurens
Moderator
Posts: 878
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:21 am
Location: USA

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by Bill Jurens »

I have the detailed rudder drawings of Bismarck here. As you mentioned, blowing off the rudder -- or rudder(s) represents a complete fantasy. How might one place the explosive? How much might be required? Where in the wreckage might the explosive charges be placed in order to assure separation, and how might one access this area in the first place? How might one be assured that blowing off the rudder(s), supposing that might be accomplished, would actually significantly improve the situation in the first place?

Nobody in their right mind would have tried this sort of operation in a drydock, much less in the open sea with the British in hot pursuit.

Bill Jurens
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2471
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by wadinga »

Hello Bill and All,

Based on your experience in such matters, would you consider the phrase:
Nobody in their right mind would have tried this sort of operation in a drydock, much less in the open sea with the British in hot pursuit

Also applies to the "fantasy fix" suggestion the Baron unfortunately included in his book, ie the welded hangar door arrangement. The idea of 5-10 tons of steel swinging wildly through an enormous arc with tens of struggling crewmen on securing ropes being either dragged to their deaths over the side or smashed to pulp by the swinging mass striking the hull is a picture even the driest landlubber can imagine after a few minutes of viewing "ships in rough seas" videos on You Tube. The idea that such a mass could be held still in the prevailing wild weather whilst someone carried out delicate underwater welding is utterly fantastical.

And that the same might apply to other ingenious pipedreams eg manhandling anchors to amidships and dangling them over the side to create drag etc etc

What the Baron does describe, in detail, very specifically, is that despite hours and hours of trying different combinations of turbine instructions, which caused one to seize temporarily through excessively violent ahead/reverse changes, it was completely impossible to achieve:
a sequence of telegraph orders could have been done to keep Bismarck pointing towards the French/Spanish coast, at even nine knots
Not at 9 knots, 15 knots or 5 knots, they are all wishful thinking.The Baron says, when speaking of Junack's testimony,
Towards morning, he later said, full power orders gradually stopped coming and the atmosphere in the ship gradually became calmer.
Subsequently when the stop engines order was given, Junack wanted to run the turbines at slow speed to stop them seizing through thermal expansion, he was told "Ach, do as you like!". It is described that Bismarck was stopped and athwart the seas and wind rolling heavily, at various times. Windage on her hull and superstructure, when stopped, probably caused her to drift downwind at 1-2 knots, ie towards France. The Baron implies this cessation of control efforts was around 08:00 ie after many, many hours of trying different telegraph orders.

Attempting to use the engines at all with the jammed rudder, in any of these combinations, only resulted, as the Baron recalls:
From there on, a serpentine line showed our swerving course to the northwest, into the wind
My italics

In many ways, if Bismarck had stopped engines much earlier and wallowed sickeningly in the troughs, being blown downwind, she might have ended up a little closer to France than she did.

These Baron Munchausen fantasy escape suggestions keep coming up, but we should all give the men who were there, and whose ship and lives were at stake, their due for their experience and ingenuity, and accept that everything feasible was tried and their situation was impossible.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
Bill Jurens
Moderator
Posts: 878
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:21 am
Location: USA

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by Bill Jurens »

I would tend to agree that the idea of using a hangar door as a rudder of some sort was also more or less a fantasy, especially if one were trying to fit such a device in heavy sea conditions, at night, and with the British in hot pursuit.

It is barely possible that Bismarck might have been able to maintain a relatively straight (but very slow) course by towing some sort of 'drogue' astern, i.e. something (somewhat like a parachute) that would provide a good deal of drag expressed directly fore-and-aft. The problem, of course, is that such a device, if it were possible to contrive and fit one, would probably require the ship to go two-thirds ahead in order to maintain a speed-over-the-ground of perhaps five or six knots.

Along similar lines, had Prinz Eugen remained with Bismarck, she might have been able to attempt a tow, but again I doubt if that could have been done at anything more than a brisk walking speed, and with the Royal Navy closing in on every side, the long-term chances of survival of the two would have been minimal. It also would have put Prinz Eugen in an uncomfortable position, probably eventually involving a choice between abandoning the tow vs remaining with Bismarck to be sunk in consort.

My own feeling is that I think that the Germans probably did all that they could considering the circumstances. The real problem probably stemmed from the decision(s), however made, to send Bismarck out on her mission in the first place.

Bill Jurens
User avatar
wadinga
Senior Member
Posts: 2471
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:49 pm
Location: Tonbridge England

Re: bismark-after torpedo hit

Post by wadinga »

Hello All,

A nice example of the power of "windage" has just occurred in the Suez Canal, where one of those monstrous giant floating shoe boxes, the MV Ever Given, carrying 20,000 shipping containers, is currently wedged across the Canal, aground bow and stern after:
that the ship “was suspected of being hit by a sudden strong wind, causing the hull to deviate from waterway and accidentally hit the bottom and run aground”
Slow forward speed, necessary with a 59m beam vessel in the Canal, could not give enough steerage control to counteract this strong wind. The Canal has been blocked for over 24 hours.

Bismarck was at the mercy of the strong wind, with her usable speed reduced to a crawl as a result of her jammed rudder. The only available balance of windage and rudder turning effect was on a northwest heading. Clearly no other course allowed even a semblance of a stable heading to be maintained.

All the best

wadinga
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
Post Reply