Spectator
Chieftain
I'm just asking because I think that there is something really unfair here but I want to make sure. So I am asking, what's the Tirpitz?
Spec.
Spec.
Do you know what the Tirpitz is?
- Thread starter Spectator
- Start date
ZultanofZex
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2002
- Messages
- 1,031
Spectator
Chieftain
Wrong. Better luck next time.
Hitro
Feistus Raclettus
And I thought he meant the Admiral...
ZultanofZex
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2002
- Messages
- 1,031
Wrong tirpitz? Well how about this lot then? Anyone that suites you?
http://images.google.com/imgres?img...180&svnum=10&hl=sv&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sa=N
http://images.google.com/imgres?img...180&svnum=10&hl=sv&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sa=N
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
Is there a point to this?
Spectator
Chieftain
DING DING DING! We got a winner!
I was just browsing some site on the Tirpitz and I learned that it was much more powerful and faster than the Bismark. Also, the Bismark sunk 23 ships including the HMS Hood but the Tirpitz sunk more than 30. The tirpitz also lasted 2 and a half years in the sea before it got sunk (Because it became Britain's primary target) and the Bismark lasted less than 1 year (Cuz the captain was stupid but that's another story).
The tirpitz should have all the fame the Bismark has but it doesn't. I find that really sad. I just had to tell some people.
Here go see: http://www.bismarck-class.dk/bismarck/bismarck_menu.html
Spec.
Spectator
Chieftain
Originally posted by zippy
What part in the sinking of the Bismark did the American navy play?
None. The Brits sunk it. I took them 2 battleships, 2 cruisers and 3 destroyers....at the same time. And it only got sunk cuz the captain of the Bismark didn't want to fill up the Oil in Danemark so 2 days later it ran almost out, they had to slow down. So the brits catched up, they torpedoed the bismard with a plane and hit the rotor. The Bismark was immobilized and got sunk. But it still took 6 ships to do it.
But the Bismark sunk the Pride and Glory of the British Navy, the HMS Hood. It only took one blow. Impressive.
Spec.
ZultanofZex
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2002
- Messages
- 1,031
If my pictures of germans still alive wasn't right, this one belongs in the History Forum.
Good thread, though.
Good thread, though.
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
The USN did not take part, it was a RN action.
George Bush wasn't in charge at that point.
Simon Darkshade
Mysterious City of Gold
Meanwhile, back in the real world...
The Bismarck sunk one ship on its one short cruise. It lasted less than a bloody week, let alone a year.
The Tirpitz had an even more inglorious career.
She did keep a sizable portion of the Home Fleet tied down watching her, but apart from that, did nothing material. Her threat was one thing; her actual achievements are miniscule.
She would not have lasted long if she had came out against USS Iowa when she was based over in England...
As the resident long time battleship addict, one felt moved to comment.
The Bismarck sunk one ship on its one short cruise. It lasted less than a bloody week, let alone a year.
The Tirpitz had an even more inglorious career.
She did keep a sizable portion of the Home Fleet tied down watching her, but apart from that, did nothing material. Her threat was one thing; her actual achievements are miniscule.
She would not have lasted long if she had came out against USS Iowa when she was based over in England...
As the resident long time battleship addict, one felt moved to comment.
Spectator
Chieftain
Originally posted by Simon Darkshade
Meanwhile, back in the real world...
The Bismarck sunk one ship on its one short cruise. It lasted less than a bloody week, let alone a year.
The Tirpitz had an even more inglorious career.
She did keep a sizable portion of the Home Fleet tied down watching her, but apart from that, did nothing material. Her threat was one thing; her actual achievements are miniscule.
She would not have lasted long if she had came out against USS Iowa when she was based over in England...
As the resident long time battleship addict, one felt moved to comment.
Ummmm...no. The tirpitz participated in more than 7 mission and in only ONE of those mission they sunk 19 Convoys comin from England and gowing to Russia. 32 left, 19 got sunk, 2 turned around on 11 made it. THAT is the most succesful mission of the Tirpitz.
The Bismark sunk 22 Convoys and the HMS Hood.
Facts are facts. Just read and learn.
http://www.bismarck-class.dk/bismarck/bismarck_menu.html
Spec.
Simon Darkshade
Mysterious City of Gold
Wrong again. The only vessel the Bismarck and Prinz Eugen sunk was Hood, a battlecruiser. It did not take only one blow, nor only one shot. It did happen early in the engagement, with a plunging shot penetrating the deck after exploding torpedo tubes, and causing a chain explosion.
A lucky shot, but one that British battlecruisers were susceptible to.
HMS Prince of Wales was damaged in the initial Battle of the Denmark Strait, but not sunk.
Bismarck did not sink the vessels you claim it did. Do get your facts right.
The reason it was sunk was not because of the decision not to oil in Denmark, which was taken for reasons of operational security among others, but because of the minor yet significant damage caused during the aforesaid battle.
It then began a run for Brest, was caught by the last possible Swordfish strike from HMS Ark Royal, and had its rudder damaged and jammed.
It then could not manuever properly, save to go in circles, and was engaged and blasted to pieces by HMS King George V and HMS Rodney, with the coup de grace being given with torpedos from the HMS Dorsetshire.
It took not a long time, and permanently hamstrung the surface assets of the Kriegsmarine, with the Fuhrer most displeased at the loss of such an expensive vessel. This affected the use of Tirpitz.
But overall, Bismarck was a costly failure of a ship, compared with the Hood, which gave 20 years of sterling service in peace and war.
knowltok2
Deity
Originally posted by Sh3kel
"While Ensign Smith flew the aircraft and evaded accurate German antiaircraft fire"
Minor part - they only spotted it before the British moved in for the kill
Well was the fire accurate, or did he evade it? Seems you really can't have both.
Also, on the ships sunk, if you are going to count transport ships (and that's fine), then you should put it in perspective to some of the more successful U-boats and American Submarines. Much greater results from a much smaller expenditure.
