WWII Naval ships

[privatehudson]

Note: This is a diversion of a discussion in the lend lease thread. Though this topic is about PQ17 and a possible battle, feel free to discuss other ships and engagements such as the best battleship ever. My vote goes with the Iowa class

First the Tirpitz range and guns were as good as the one of Washington. Don´t compare the caliberon both ships directly! Although the German guns were 1" less due to the construction they were better than campared British and Amercan.

Uhmmm no. The American 16" guns such as those on the Iowa and even Washington could throw far heavier broadsides into the action than the Bismarck could throw back which is quite important after all.

Also the first hit on the Bismarck on the final fight destroyed the main range finder making the artillery nearly blind.

She was firing for 13 minutes before being hit. Assuming that hit took out the central range finding equipment, she was firing for another 6 minutes on seperate range finders fore and aft. Her final two turrets fired for another 5 minutes under the rear range finders. At no point during that time did she score a single hit with her main guns On the other hand The design of the ship also caused this problem in itself.

The hit of the POW on the Bismarck was not more than a mosquito hurt BTW

Not really, it helped persuade the Germans to flee for France rather than continue, hardly a minor effect, especially in the light of the Bismarck's specific orders

Also the German optic range finders were the world´s best at this time.

Which is why she had such trouble hitting anything in that last battle is it? Next you'll wax lyrical about her radar, which of course wasn't that good either Btw, the best in the world are useless if they're so easy to knock out, which the Bismarck's were

So a fight between Tirpitz and KGV and Washington would be a tough fight but with a better chance for the Tirpitz (52-48).

Highly debateable, especially since the KGV class had proved capable of damaging the Bismarck and was the lighter of the two ships

Also the German ships were faster than the US and British and were able to hit on great ranges

Uhmmm Bismark/Tirpitz was only slightly faster actually, around 2 knots. Hard to evaluate the long range theory as Bismarck's only hits were at relatively close range.

So in a fight with these ships and three German pocket battleships/ heavy cruiser I don´t think that the allies were surely the winner.

4 Heavy cruisers, each of which more than capable of damaging the under-armoured Pocket Battleships. Many light cruisers, many more destroyers than the Germans could have had. Possibility of a KGV class ship in the engagement. Somehow I think that 4 Heavy Cruisers, a score of smaller ships and a possible large battleship was more than able to take on that force. Despite your derision of the effects of the RN on Graf Spee, the fact is that with just one single 8" cruiser, she was damaged enough to make her withdraw. With 2 of them for every pocket battleship, one can assume the fight would not be one sided.

Oh and on further reading, there would have been only one Pocket Battleship as Lutzow ran aground off Narvik

You overrate the allied ships while underrating the ablity of the German ships.

Not really. Despite the reputation of the Bismarck, when it comes to results it's a scramble to find much concrete evidence that she was such a brilliant ship. Sure she survived a pounding from the RN, but at the same time her ability to do anything in return in that fight was proved to be zip. She may have been afloat, but she'd long since been rendered incapacitated and was merely waiting for the inevitable. We're forced to look to her hits on the POW, which whilst numerous were hardly crippling, and that on the Hood, which to be fair can only be called a fluke. She was also woefully underarmed when it came to AA fire compared to say an Iowa class ship, which with Victorious' planes buzzing around may have been a problem.

The Washington and DOY (assuming DOY was used that way and not against other ships) against a Tirpitz would have been nothing like the clash of POW and Hood against Bismarck. The hood was underarmoured, and the Bismarck got lucky. None of this would have happened against the better armoured Washington, who's armoured deck was considerably superior to the Hood's. A closer comparison would be the KGV and Rodney against Bismarck, and well we all know what happened there now don't we?

Oh the Tirpitz was 52.000ts while the Washington was only 35.000 ts big!

That only goes to show the Washington was one hell of a ship, 35,000 tons and bigger guns, thicker armour

 

[Esckey]

Food for thought:

Out of 700 shots fired at the Bismark, during that final show down, only 4 rounds actually made it through the thick armour(Plenty wasted the superstucture and the guns) 2 made it through the upper armour and 2 through the 14" armour belt. All of these were from the Rodney' 16" guns.

And the Tripitz never fired it's main guns in anger. Ever. Some ship.

I'll dig up more later

 

[privatehudson]

True, but the aims of the British were achieved, she was put out of action enough to torpedo her, though she scuttled herself around this time too admitedly. It's to be noted that Tovey's ships weren't exactly accurate either, he remarked during the fight that he may as well throw his binoculars at the Bismarck for all the good his gunnery was doing However, the Bismarck's much celebrated firing systems didn't do a whole great deal more in the history of either ship.

In fact, in the final analysis, despite the romanticism around her, the Bismarck class really ended up producing very little results for all her worth. One did precious little other than distract RN battleships (and lets face it we had enough of them!) for it's career. The other left on a maiden voyage were it was specifically intended to only engage capital ships if they protected convoys. Instead it ends up engaging the Hood and Prince of Wales, which whilst sucessful in the battle, ended up working against that mission aim. She was then damaged by ancient (but valuble) aircraft that she proved unable to drive off. Finally she was smashed into a floating wreck by the guns of two ships that most people would rate as inferior to her and sunk/scuttled. Sinking the Hood was mostly fluke, and some schools of thought claim the Pince Eugen had more than a little to do with this. Either way the RN could afford to trade one out of date thinly armoured battlecruiser for a Bismarck, we had pleanty of them after all. Loosing a valuable battleship with only an old enemy Battlecruiser as any kind of result isn't my idea of a great sucess. The class showed promise, but for a variety of reasons never quite lived up to it

 

[Adler17]

Okay PH, here is my reply.
The guns on Washington and Iowa were form the same caliber but not the same type since it was an elder design, even a bit elder than the German 15" guns. Also the ship should have heavier armour and heavier guns and weights 1/3 less and a better combat value ??? No way. The ship was good but not better than Bismarck. And a heavier gun is not in every way meaning the better penetrating power. Indeed the German 15" guns were only sinking the Hood. And indeed she was only underarmoured battlecruiser. Nevertheless another modern battleship was hit about 10 times by the Bismarck: POW. She was so damaged after these few hits that she was lucky not being sunk. Also her hits on the Bismarck caused only small damages. So in a battle between Washington and KGV (or DOY, I don´t know which one) and Tirpitz both had to target Tirpitz.
Bismarck was indeed firing for 13 (resp. 15) minutes at the enemy with her main guns and was not successfull. But the fight was opened at a bigger range and it was bad luck for her that the range finder was out of action. With it she would have been able to sink a British ship. Also she was only damaged by Rodney- at short distance. And none of these hits made a deadly wound. She was still intact floating (except superstructure) when she scuttled. So a fight between Washington and KGV against Tripitz was still a tough fight.
Then we come to the other ships. Altogh I doubt that with only 2 heavy cruiser resp. pocket battleships such an operation would have been made, we´ll assume here the battle. The German ships were designed very well. As I mentioned before the Spee got only lost because of misleading intelligence news. So a fight between 3 German heavy ships and 4 British/ US would be a slightly German advantage but 2 to 4 a slightly allied advantage I admit. But not so far that a victory was sure. Since the Germans could use their torpedoes very well...
The next point is the Victorious. Okay, the Bismarck- class was still undergunned concerning the FlaK. Nevertheless the Albacores of the Victorious attacked the Tirptz before the Operation Rösselsprung (PQ17) took place. She avoided the attacks undamaged and could shoot down some of the attacking Albacores instead. In a sea battle this is more crucial indeed. But we shouldn´t forget the German planes. PQ 17 was attacked by 130 Ju 88 dive bombers, 43 He 111 tropedo planes and 29 He 115 sea planes, mostly equipped with torpedoes. So 202 German planes were also available to attack the Allied forces.
At least we have to consider that Washington and KGV had only a heavy cruiser, a light cruiser in companion and 13 destroyer, while the four mentioned other heavy cruiser were waiting at the Bear isle. So was there enough time for the allies to join them? Only together they would have a chance. If the cruiser came too late...
This is pure speculation concerning such a battle which never took place concerning the end of the battle. Concerning the combat abilities of the ships it is more than speculation.

Adler

 

[privatehudson]

Indeed the German 15" guns were only sinking the Hood. And indeed she was only underarmoured battlecruiser. Nevertheless another modern battleship was hit about 10 times by the Bismarck: POW. She was so damaged after these few hits that she was lucky not being sunk. Also her hits on the Bismarck caused only small damages. So in a battle between Washington and KGV (or DOY, I don´t know which one) and Tirpitz both had to target Tirpitz

Seven times by the main guns IIRC, and she was still capable of sailing away at the end. POW was also not complete at the time of the engagement, and with just a proportion of her guns firing still did enough damage to prevent the Bismarck from fulfilling her main mission. A fully finished DOY would almost certainly have done better, as it proved against the Scharnhorst (which isn't the same class as a Bismarck, but was still a decent ship...)

Bismarck was indeed firing for 13 (resp. 15) minutes at the enemy with her main guns and was not successfull. But the fight was opened at a bigger range and it was bad luck for her that the range finder was out of action.

The range finder wasn't put out of action for those 13 minutes as far as I know, and even then she had fore and aft range finders to target the enemy with and co-ordinate the firing of the two turrets on those areas. At no point did she score a hit with her 15" guns. Coincidentally, in a battle against the Kirishima in the Pacific using Radar, the Washington put 9 of her 16" shells into the enemy inside 7 minutes at shorter ranges. She'd been refitted in the meantime admitedly (Not sure of the details so maybe her targetting and radar weren't as good at the time of PQ17), but it certainly makes you think considering she only fired 75 in total...

With it she would have been able to sink a British ship.

Not really. The Rodney was considerably better armoured than either the Hood or KGV and would have survived much longer in ship to ship combat than either, nor would she have been likely to have fallen prey to the kind of thing that sank the Hood. The KGV was a finished ship, unlike POW and almost certainly would have done better had she been hit. The POW was not sunk by Bismarck in the engagement either despite being unfinished.

Also she was only damaged by Rodney- at short distance

Hardly applicable, the damage was negligible to that inflicted on her

And none of these hits made a deadly wound. She was still intact floating (except superstructure) when she scuttled. So a fight between Washington and KGV against Tripitz was still a tough fight.

Deadly no, but the effect of the gunfire of the two smashed the Bismarck into a floating hull with no ability to return fire, with no effective return to show for this. Without the luck the Bismarck had against the Hood, it's likely the result would be almost exactly the same as this. I fail to see the achievement in being afloat if you can't fight back

The German ships were designed very well. As I mentioned before the Spee got only lost because of misleading intelligence news.

When she faced much smaller cruisers, against those four we can assume it would have been harder if not impossible. For all her decent building, the Spee and it's sisters couldn't withstand punishment on that level for long.

So a fight between 3 German heavy ships and 4 British/ US would be a slightly German advantage but 2 to 4 a slightly allied advantage I admit.

This ignores the effect of the numerous allied smaller ships available which would also need to be considered in such an analysis.

But we shouldn´t forget the German planes. PQ 17 was attacked by 130 Ju 88 dive bombers, 43 He 111 tropedo planes and 29 He 115 sea planes, mostly equipped with torpedoes. So 202 German planes were also available to attack the Allied forces.

That is largely dependent on where the battle takes place, Pound for example didn't plan to fight in the area where PQ17 was attacked.

At least we have to consider that Washington and KGV had only a heavy cruiser, a light cruiser in companion and 13 destroyer, while the four mentioned other heavy cruiser were waiting at the Bear isle. So was there enough time for the allies to join them? Only together they would have a chance. If the cruiser came too late...

I'd take on Tirpitz and the other two with that force I'd be less likely to win, but I'd stand a decent chance I think

However, Pound's plan had been to fight closer to where Tovey was than where PQ17 was, which would indicate that the 4 cruisers would have enough time to reach Washington and DOY. If we assume the battle takes place, it would likely have been there as opposed to PQ17 which had been abbandonned to it's fate, ie it would be unlikely that Pound or Tovey would have been eager to then saddle itself to protecting the convoy but rather taking on Tirpitz.

Also the ship should have heavier armour and heavier guns and weights 1/3 less and a better combat value

I'm merely remarking that it is an achiement to fit heavier armour and bigger guns into a ship of such smaller weight.

The guns on Washington and Iowa were form the same caliber but not the same type since it was an elder design, even a bit elder than the German 15" guns.

I never said they were the same, only that their performance would be similar to say the Rodney's, which pounded the Bismarck and proved able to penetrate the armour.

No way. The ship was good but not better than Bismarck.

Never meant to say it was It's unlikely to be given that it was quite a bit older than the Bismarck. It's the Iowa class (for example) that beats the Bismarck hands down

And a heavier gun is not in every way meaning the better penetrating power.

It's not everything admitedly but things like heavier shell and so on are important. It would also seem that the 16" gun would be likely capable of penetrating the armour Tirpitz had.

 

[Adler17]

Yes she wasn´t ready and yes POW hit the Bismarck 7 times. And the damages? Bismarck hit POW also around 10 times. So comparing it: Although not fully operational at the beginning the damages of her was very serious. She was indeed in danger to sink. This is not due to the incompleteness but the damage of the Bismarck. On the Bismarck the damage was a small leak in the fuel tanks. That was all. Nothing critical. She reamined strong enough.
First Kirishima was a battlecruiser. And as I said before hitting is one thing but penetrating the armour another...
Rodney was the only one being able to penertrate the Bismarck´s armour. Oh before I´ll forget it the main range finder were critical as the replacing ones were not as accurate. Rodney was also an elder design. And despite the heavier armour the German guns would have been able to take her out.
Didn´t I mention the escorts? The British had 13 destroyers with the battleships and the Germans 7 destroyer and three torpedo boats. Since the German ships were superior to British ships in one to one fights I suppose it was equal. And since the German crews as well as the Japanese showed a great skill of using torpedoes (loss of HMS Edinburgh, HMS Charybdis for instance) the British ships had to be aware of them.
Concerning the battle place. Even if it was not near the convoy there would have been enough time to attack the British forces. But as you said this is pure speculation. The only fact to say is there were 202 planes available for the Germans to attack the allied forces.
Okay, we should assume a battle near the convoy. This makes a German air stike on the big ships more propable. If the German reconaissance would have detected these ships (Uboats, planes) all available planes would have attacked, damaging these ships at least. Better odds for Tirpitz to take out the rest...
Rodney fired hundred of shells on Bismarck and only 4 managed it to come through the armour belt. And this by firing on clostest distance. Do you really think the Washington would have been more successfull? You can fire with a 4 cm gun on a Tiger II for hours and hours. At a certain point the armour will be penetrated. But the time to do so you don´t have in battle. The loss of the Bismarck was due to the fact she couldn´t maneuver. But a maneuverable Tirpitz would have been a much more dangerous enemy. Consider there had to be Grand slam bombs to take out the Tirpitz. Smaller bombs were not very effective.
Oh, Scharnhorst sunk due to the torpedoes of the destroyer and not the hits by DOY. And I guess if her escort was with her she might have escaped or possibly damaged DOY severly.
I also think Iowa was better than Bismarck. Although such a fight would have been also tough for her and a lucky hit by Bismarck would have been dangerous. Nevertheless the Bismarck class battleships were the best battleships on the European theatre, including USS Washington.
Heavier shells are important but also their construction. Compare to Jutland: German ships could severly damage and sink British ships and although the British had the bigger guns they were in no way successfull. And even the only loss of a German capital ship, SMS Lützow, could have been avoided possibly. So indeed the construction of the shells is important. And still the German guns were as good as allied guns of a bigger caliber.

Adler

 

[privatehudson]

Yes she wasn´t ready and yes POW hit the Bismarck 7 times. And the damages? Bismarck hit POW also around 10 times. So comparing it: Although not fully operational at the beginning the damages of her was very serious. She was indeed in danger to sink. This is not due to the incompleteness but the damage of the Bismarck. On the Bismarck the damage was a small leak in the fuel tanks. That was all. Nothing critical. She reamined strong enough.

To my knowledge POW hit Bismarck just three times with her main guns. From what I've read, POW was hit 7* times with 15" guns, which is what I meant. It is important that she wasn't fully operational, for example she never fired all her guns and her peformance was limited in other aspects. And as I said, the POW was badly damaged and withdrawing, but not sinking or so close that it could not withdraw. As for the Bismarck, that clearly misses the point, the damage was critical to her stated mission by reducing her range and slightly her speed.

First Kirishima was a battlecruiser. And as I said before hitting is one thing but penetrating the armour another...

I wasn't pointing to the penetration ability but the accuracy of the Washington's firing which at that time was at least as good as the Bismarck's Even if we take the higher figure of 10 hits with main guns, this took the Bismarck twice as long (roughly 14 minutes of firing in total at Hood and POW) to achieve a similar number of hits. Then bear in mind that the Bismarck probably scored a maximum of 7 hits with it's main guns and probably more like 4, and we have a rather interesting accuracy comparison, though you would of course have to allow for differing range in the two scenarios and whether the targetting and radar of Washington had been upgraded between the possible Tirpitz encounter and it's fight with Kirishima.

Rodney was the only one being able to penertrate the Bismarck´s armour. Oh before I´ll forget it the main range finder were critical as the replacing ones were not as accurate.

However critical parts of the Bismarck such as the range finders were placed on lightly armoured decks and exposed to the risk of smaller guns putting them out of action as happened, a definate design flaw for such a ship that caused it's downfall in the final battle as much as the manouver problem.

Rodney was also an elder design. And despite the heavier armour the German guns would have been able to take her out.

There's no real proof either way to be frank, Rodney was well armoured and Bismarck was totally unable to fire effectively at her anyway

Didn´t I mention the escorts? The British had 13 destroyers with the battleships and the Germans 7 destroyer and three torpedo boats. Since the German ships were superior to British ships in one to one fights I suppose it was equal.

Stretching, outnumbered 2:1 is not good odds for a destroyer engagement without mentioning the light cruiser.

The only fact to say is there were 202 planes available for the Germans to attack the allied forces.

Which would have been at longer ranges than they engaged PQ17 and they would be dealing with Victorious' planes and the considerably better AA on the allied side than PQ17 could provide.

Rodney fired hundred of shells on Bismarck and only 4 managed it to come through the armour belt. And this by firing on clostest distance. Do you really think the Washington would have been more successfull?

Frankly yes, for one Washington was more accurate than Rodney

Secondly, you again don't seem to grasp the important aspect of this fight. Despite not penetrating the armour much, the RN smashed the Bismarck until she could no longer return fire whatsoever and left her a mess. Yes there was few penetrations, but the job was still done regardless. Pointing to the fact that she was afloat and not penetrated doesn't pay attention to the fact that she was a wreck

The loss of the Bismarck was due to the fact she couldn´t maneuver. But a maneuverable Tirpitz would have been a much more dangerous enemy. Consider there had to be Grand slam bombs to take out the Tirpitz. Smaller bombs were not very effective

And this lack of manouvere and fighting ability was achieved by hits on the two areas in which Bismarck lacked (relatively) in armour, attacks under the waterline and attacks from above. Either way, the Bismarck was certainly by no mean invincible and the results are not anywhere as good as they could have been.

Oh, Scharnhorst sunk due to the torpedoes of the destroyer and not the hits by DOY. And I guess if her escort was with her she might have escaped or possibly damaged DOY severly.

Again, the important point is that it was the DOY that reduced Scharnhorst to the state that the torpedoes could be fired into her. There's absolutely no point in ignoring the effect of the DOY just because the coup-de-grace was administered by someone else

I also think Iowa was better than Bismarck. Although such a fight would have been also tough for her and a lucky hit by Bismarck would have been dangerous.

A lucky hit from any battleship is dangerous

Nevertheless the Bismarck class battleships were the best battleships on the European theatre, including USS Washington

I disagree, the Washington IMO was probably at least her equal Oh and the Iowa also briefly served in the European theatre

Tell you what, lets find a computer simulation game and refight the battle as it might have been ok? Right now I'm in the middle of creating a naval wargame set of rules for the period, and I promise you I'll refight something like the battle for a test scenario ok?

*Sources are mixed on this issue, some claim the Bismarck scored 7 hits on the POW. One of the better sites on the Bismarck which describes the action in the strait in detail attributes 4 to Bismarck and 3 to Eugen and describes all in detail. Not sure which is right to be honest

 

[Adler17]

Yes but the hits on POW were worsening her situation dramatically. The damages after the sinking of the Hood made it impossible to remain on the field. She was indeed not fully operational but the hits on her were much worse than the hits she achieved. Indeed HER armour belt was penetrated and so she retreated. That she was not fully operational is clear. But this can´t deny the damages on her.
Okay the guns on Washington might be better. But accuracy and penetratability are two different things. Rodney shot hundreds of shells on Bismarck and only 4 were penetrating the armour belt! So Washington might have been able to fire on Tirpitz more accurate but I doubt more effective. Indeed her guns could only fire twice a minute while Bismarck and irpitz could fire three times. Also Washington was much weaker in armour than Bismarck and Tripitz. In the Solomons when fighting against the Japanese a Kongo class battlecruiser was able to cripple the South Dakota an even more advanced ship than Washington. And she used old 14" guns from ww1! How about German 15" guns which were newly developed?
Since when is 10 to 13 1:2? The German ships were better than the British so I think both forces were at least equal. Considering the light cruiser: the German destroyer would have tried to torpedo it.
A force of 202 planes IS a real danger for a fleet. And such an attack would have been costly but nevertheless I doubt that all would have missed their targets.
Bismarck was doomed when the torpedo of this Swordfish hit her. She was not able to avoid the British attack. When driving and avoiding fire she would have been a target much harder to hit as Tirpitz later. Even if the accuracy of Washington was so good I doubt she was able to hit her so much that the damage is critical. And a big British force was not able to sink the Bismarck. With her speed in combat, if she was caught she would have been in a much better position either to flee or to do maximum damage on the enemy before sinking. Firing for hours on an immobile ship without help (and not sinking her) is one thing. The other is facing a fully operational ship of that class.
Bismarck was not invinceable as nothing is. But Bismarck and Tirpitz were nearly invinceable on the European theatre when fully operational engaging the enemy. The RN was in no way able to cope with this thread and if the ships had been used in a better way they would have been the terror of the RN. Again the RN was not able to SINK the Bismarck and the Tirpitz in a gun fight (after it you can use torpedoes to finish them off indeed, but since the range of the torpedoes was limited and to be fired in the range of the guns of Bismarck she had to be fought down. And even with torpedoes you had to hit her over a dozen times to sink her (compare Scharnhorst). That is nearly unsinkable in a normal battle).
At last Washington EQUAL to Bismarck . No! Never. But I concur there should be a simulation. Great naval battles of the Atlantic or Fighting steel come in my mind. Unfortuanetly Fighting Steel is not a real simulation and has a bug making it unplayable on my PC. And GNBA V (aka Burning Steel) is not so good liek part one. And this part hasn´t included a scenario editor, isn´t very playable on modern PCs and has no US unit included. Do you know such a game?
Iowa against Tirpitz. Well that would have been a fight. A clash of Titans.

Adler

 

[privatehudson]

*kicks CFC* Damn forum wouldn't accept one of my long posts and now I've lost it

Afraid this is one I'll have to continue after my hols to the USA sorry Adler, if you're still up for a discussion around early November I'll be back

 

[dgfred]

*kicks CFC* Damn forum wouldn't accept one of my long posts and now I've lost it

Afraid this is one I'll have to continue after my hols to the USA sorry Adler, if you're still up for a discussion around early November I'll be back

@ p h - what does "after my hols to the USA" mean , just
wondering.

 

[privatehudson]

I'm spending just over two weeks in the USA from the 16th October

 

[dgfred]

I'm spending just over two weeks in the USA from the 16th October

The 15th is my 40th B-day! My present will be a day late . Where
are you going if you don't mind my asking?

 

[privatehudson]

I'll answer in PMs so we don't go off topic here more

 

[pawpaw]

Also Washington was much weaker in armour than Bismarck and Tripitz. In the Solomons when fighting against the Japanese a Kongo class battlecruiser was able to cripple the South Dakota an even more advanced ship than Washington. And she used old 14" guns from ww1!
Adler

weaker in armour? the washington had 12 inch armoured beltline and 16 inch on her turrets. the tirpitz had 12.3 inch on the beltline and 14.1 on the turrets. the south dakota got shot up simplely because an early shot destroyed her electrical system--no power. its easy to shot-up a ship that can't flee or fight back

 

[privatehudson]

Actually I managed to get time, a meeting with someone was cancelled So where was I...

On the South Dakota, I'm afraid you're way off. Firstly she had major electrical problems, bad for her as she needed them for her night fighting capacity. Even so she still managed to land a hit or two in the engagement. Secondly, she was not "crippled" in the slightest, most of her problems were light ones, damage to her guidance radars, plot radar and superstructure, all only affecting her ability to return fire, none endangering her seriously. She might never have even been seen but for a mistake in her own gunfire. Thirdly, the Kirishima hit her once with her 14" guns, most of the other hits came from surrounding smaller craft and the 2nd guns on the ship. A good clue as to how "crippled" SD was after those salvos was that when Kirishima settled a powerful searchlight beam on her SD (despite loosing most of her direction/range finders you will note) smashed two 16" shells into her. Kirishima extinguished the beam straight away

Now lets examine the POW situation.

What I'm doing is looking at the big picture here. You start with the Germans sailing with standing orders to only engage enemy capital ships if they protect convoys, and an overall mission to raid and destroy convoys. The RN ships began with the aim of intercepting and stopping the Germans from doing this. The RN ships are inferior overall, either by older design or being incomplete, but either way you could argue that with the sheer volume of capital ships the RN actually had, either were expendable if the job was done.

Now lets look at the results of Denmark Strait. The Germans engage against two standing orders (the other being cruisers never engaging capital ships) and against the mission they are on. They suceed in destroying one of the expendable ships, in fact the more expendable ship. They fail because in doing so they loose their ability to carry out their mission. By the end of the battle they must either run back the way they came, or flee to France, but either way their mission fails. Irrespective of the damage inflicted on POW and Hood, the fact remains that Bismarck, in engaging both failed in it's mission for very little gain.

That is why for all the damage they inflicted, The germans come out of the battle with a strategic draw, assuming they pull back to Norway, and a strategic defeat if they sail for France, which almost certainly would doom her. In this picture, the damage to POW is interesting, but hardly conclusive to our later conclusions about PQ17.

Onto PQ17 then, and I'll start with the planes. With respect to this, when engaged with the underprotected convoy which had no air cover, they only managed 10 sunk merchant ships. Against enemy planes supported with decent AA cover, I can't see them being terribly important, though they would no doubt affect the outcome, depending of course on the site of the battle. If we look at the allied planes, this could cause some considerable problems for the enemy if Victorious launched torpedo bombers (dunno that they had them then, not checked, I'd imagine so though). Torpedoes were the bane of the German heavy units and were always a serious problem if they hit home.

So we come to the Tirpitz's ability to engage a combination of Washington and DOY, and in this we need to divert into comparisons to the Rodney/KGV action against the Bismarck, and firstly gunfire.

On the issue of number of shots per minute, you quote the maximum amounts, when a more useful comparison would be the actual ability of said ships to fire in combat, which throws in the need to compute ranges and so on. If we take the Bismarck in Denmark Strait, we have her firing around 104 rounds in 14 minutes, which is around about 7.4 rounds a minute. On the other hand we have the Washington at Guadalcanal firing 75 rounds in 7 minutes, which is 10.7 per minute. Even allowing for the extra gun on the Washington, it's clear that Washington could fire faster, more accurately in comparison to the Bismarck or Tirpitz. Another point is that Washington fired all of those rounds at night by radar and still scored more hits than Bismarck in 1/2 the time. We therefore must assume that Washington was capable of more accurate and faster fire.

Now we come to the ability to damage the enemy. Yes I said damage and not penetrate their armour. You make much of the failiure of RN ships to sink the Bismarck and others with gunfire, which in itself is important, but certainly not the be all and end all of any naval battle. Ultimately, throwing more shells at the enemy than she can reply with is important, turrets don't have to be smashed for example to stop working, belt armour doesn't need to be penetrated to render an enemy ship inneffective. The important point here is not necessarily ability to sink an enemy, but to put her out of action. There were numerous times when German heavy ships were put out of action/driven off by RN gunfire, and on the occasions that the ship was slowed enough to prevent her escape, more often than not she was taken out by torpedoes. In a major engagement it would be ideal to silence an enemy like Tirpitz then turn on the others rather than fire continuously looking for penetrating hits to cause serious damage. Silenced and dead in the water ships can be finished off later after all. It's not as good or spectacular as the effects Bismarck had in Denmark Strait, but it worked again and again against the Germans.

So whether the Washington could or could not penetrate the Tirpitz's armour is only part of what we need to look at. The weight of fire coming from two very accurate ships on the allied side would have been very difficult for Tirpitz to counter. Remember that in the examples I mentioned for DOY and Washington (Guadalcanal and the Scharnhorst sinking) both targets were not easy, yet both were hit numerous times by the allied gunfire, so hitting a moving enemy target didn't seem terribly difficult. Once you establish this you must think that the sheer number of potential hits the two allied ships could in theory produce would not necessarily need to penetrate the armour of Tirpitz. If we look at the similar gun battle with Bismarck, though only four went through the armour, the Bismarck ceased to be effective. If we assume that the DOY and Washington had the time to make their shells be felt, we must assume that Tirpitz would rapidly suffer a similar series of problems as it's sister, ie not in danger of sinking but dead in the water and not returning fire.

Which brings us to the hope Tirpitz had, which essentially is luck. Washington (I'll assume her prime target would be the bigger ship) was very well armoured. We literally will never know what effect Bismarck's 15" guns would have on a ship like Washington as she never scored a hit on one. What we do know is that she would have considerably less chance of doing to Washington what she did to Hood. Penetration wasn't the only thing that smashed the Hood, it's bad design brought about it's end also. Washington was better designed and better armoured. We're talking very lucky for Tirpitz to knock her out quickly, and all the time she's taking punishing, damaging shots from the enemy too. In the final analysis, Tirpitz is relying on luck in getting one of the enemy before the affect of weight of numbers in shells on her stops her being effective like her sister was. It's all about the maths, unless something unusual happens, Tirpitz is doomed. She stands a better chance of causing an unusual effect I grant you, but otherwise she's had it.

Now if we move onto the lighter ships. A good description of precisely what these "torpedo boats" are would be useful, as the common usage here is something akin to an e-boat whereas if you're counting them as similar to a destroyer, I doubt you mean that. We still have to consider the possibility of more allied light ships though, for example from the convoy possibly depending on the location. Either way the fight would be to the slightly in favour of the allies due to numbers and the light cruiser, and further to their favour if more light craft arrived.

Then we must look to the last category here, that of the heavy cruiser engagement. I agree that the Pocket battleship class were good, but let's not be fooled here, their armour was very weak compared to her other aspects like arnament. Facing off against 1 heavy and 2 light cruisers is one matter. Facing off against four heavy cruisers with just another heavy cruiser to help you isn't what I'd call easy to say the least. All of the allied ships were better than the heavy cruiser that Spree faced in some way or another, and all would have been capable of hurting the enemy when in range. The punishment would have been bad yes, that was the main thing about the Pocket Battleships, they hurt you... badly. If you survived that though long enough, they were relatively easy to damage. Close though it would be, my money would be on the cruisers in this one.

Onto other matters then

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you about the RN's inability to handle the Bismarck class in it's surface raider role. As seen in the Spee, and the Bismarck, the advantage the RN had was numbers. All it ever needed was time to hunt down and collect forces to attack an enemy raider and that would be likely all that was needed. That was to all intents and purposes the RN's forte, use the weight of numbers it has to be able to provide sufficient of each type of ship needed in most cases. If we look at the Bismarck sortie, the RN rapidly deployed to stop her and did through the use of it's wide resources and different ships. It's easy to argue that the sinking of Bismarck owed much to fluke and it did, but extended operations as a surface raider would have brought that kind of attention sooner or later on her to be fair, so in all likelyhood other similar operations that Bismarck or Tirpitz tried probably would have had some sucess, but equally probably would have resulted in their loss at some point too. They'd have been a problem, but they'd have been hunted down sooner or later in the war, if they'd ever been used again that is given Hitler's theories, especially if the Bismarck had come back ignominiously after Denmark Strait.

Also a correction, neither Rodney or KGV fired at Bismarck for "hours" as the final fight lasted around 1 hour 13 minutes. Both were badly innacurate in the fight, but it's an exaggeration to say they fired at Bismarck for hours without destroying her.

Unfortunately I've never held much for naval computer wargames, I tend to go for tabletop ones. I'll send you the results of any refights of this battle we may do if you like

 

[Esckey]

I've never understood, and probably never will, why some armies have to have the biggest thing, and I mean big like jaw doppingly obsenly BIG, weapons. Germany had a few really bing honking rail guns(almost totaly useless they're only true success was pounding Sevestapol) then there's the Muas, and the russians had some strange ideas too.

Anyways my point is, why did Germany give the Bismark the job of nailing convoys when their various cruisers and battle cruisers were doing a fine job, like the Dresner(that one that got sunk in that Chilean Bay but the Brits)

 

[Adler17]

The mission of Operation Rheinübung was failed, but as I said in the other thread: Hood was the British pride and flagship despite her lack of combat power. POW was not ready indeed (the Germans thought in the battle it was KGV as they assumed no one would be so stupid to send a new ship like POW into the battle...). With bothz ships sunk the return of Bismarck to Norway would have been a triumph for the Kriegsmarine and Viceadmiral Lütjens. Then both ships, Bismarck and Tirpitz would have been used in a planned way becoming a nightmare for the British. But indeed both fights Bismarck fought are only particularly significant.
Onto the planes: The German planes did sink indeed only ten ships, but several others were damaged. Also they only attacked in relative small groups. Against such a fleet all available planes would have been used- with much better chances. Also IIRC Uboats sunk 8 by the Luftwaffe damaged ships...
The Victorious had Albacore torpedo planes. But her crew was very inexperienced. They attacked a month earlier Tirpitz with torpedoes but all missed her. Additional 2 of the planes were shot down by Tirpitz´ FlaK. I don´t think there was so much time to train the pilots.
As I mentioned before the battles fought by the Bismarck are only partly significant. Also the Pacific was another area with other conditions. There the battles were usually fought at short distance. Bismarck was able to fire the guns three times per minute, the USS Washington only twice. Also the rangefinder on the Tirpitz were the best Germany had. Also Tirpitz (and also Bismarck) had RADAR, although it was not very good. And in the fight against Hood Bismarck could´nt use the RADAR because they just repaired it. That´s why PE drove at the lead and was the first target of Holland.
Bismarck was blind when her rangefinder was hit. She was also not maneuverable. So she was a good target, nearly as good as a sitting duck. A mobile ship with a working range finder was much better able to avoid being hit and hit the enemy herself. All vital stations on the Bismarck were still intact when she was scuttled despite the hits on her. I just read that her armoured deck was never penetrated and only one 14" shell penetrated the side belt. I will recheck this. So I think both ships, DOY and Washington had much work to do. Although I think no German admiral would have went into such a battle without need (being able to retreat). Nevertheless if they had both battleships had to fight the Tirpitz, while the other German ships would have been able to help Tirpitz. This depends where the battle is fought and with how many cruiser available on the Allied side. If there was only the light cruiser and the heavy cruiser Hipper would have attacked them, with aid by the 2nd artillery of the battleships, while Scheer would have fired with her guns on the enemy. And despite having just 11" guns they would have done their part.
So my speculations on that battle:
1. battle between DOY and Washington vs. Admiral Scheer and Tirpitz with Tirpitz as main opponent.
2. Battle between Hipper and CL, CA, with help from the 2nd artillery.
3. Luftwaffe gets order to start. This will last just say two hours to attack In the meantime Victorious can attack, but her crew is very inexperienced. So air support for both sides is very speculative.
4. the Destroyer fight. I rechecked it. Indeed there were only 2 torpedo boats which were depached but 12 German destroyer which were better than the British ones. So the 12: 13 is a German advantage. So the German ships were in the better situation to launch a torpedo attack at the enemy.
5. the other cruiser. The allies will be in the advantage if they are there in time. If not and only the mentioned forces are there the allies should not have engaged the enemy.
It lasted too long to cripple the Tirpitz while she was able to retaliate. And even if she got damaged the other German ships would have been able to do their part to attack the enemy battleships with torpedoes (destroyer). They needed 110 minutes to damage the Bismarck that she was scuttled. I don´t think they had the time to do so now. In this battle Tirpitz guns would have done a tremendous damage on both ships. And in this time the other German ships would have been able to attack the enemy.
Of course this is mere speculation. A battle never fought is another thing than discussing a real battle.
In GNBNA I fought several times with a Bismarck class ship and two pocket battleships against two other British battleships and was mostly successfull. So we can only speculate. Neverthless I think a fight against the battleship group would not be an easy task. But I think the Germans would have won it.
I think we have discussed nearly every detail except the Uboats. So have a nice US trip. Oh and take enough herbicides against wild bushes with you .

Adler

 

[Adler17]

Ecksey, Germany had in ww2 only heavy ships as raiders. Dresden was ww1. They did indeed in the first years and later in the Ice sea a fine job in sinking enemy convoy ships. Destroyer and Torpedo boats also made some attacks but not so important ones. Admiral Scheer for instance was in the Indian Ocean and fought there.

Adler

 

[privatehudson]

Lutjens had no intention whatsoever of finishing the POW off, he feared that other RN heavy units would be able to engage him if he did. If he fled to Norway it would have been with the sole result of the Hood, which in the the light of the orders he was under and Hitler's caution over the use of surface vessels, it's hardly wild conjecture to assume that this would not be viewed well after the initial hype died down over the Hood. Again, like I said, like any commerce raider the Germans had, a prolonged series of sorties would have brought them similar attention every time until sunk. Problematical, but hardly impossible for the RN to deal with.

As I mentioned before the battles fought by the Bismarck are only partly significant. Also the Pacific was another area with other conditions. There the battles were usually fought at short distance. Bismarck was able to fire the guns three times per minute, the USS Washington only twice. Also the rangefinder on the Tirpitz were the best Germany had. Also Tirpitz (and also Bismarck) had RADAR, although it was not very good. And in the fight against Hood Bismarck could´nt use the RADAR because they just repaired it. That´s why PE drove at the lead and was the first target of Holland.

Maximum rate of fire means nothing sorry All the maximum rate is worth damn all if you can't keep it firing faster than the enemy in battle conditions. So repeating a worn out point is quite irrelevant to the equation. Now Radar, yes they did, but at the same time, so did Washington, after all this is what smashed Kirishima and other ships at Guadalcanal, and for all the alleged skill of German radar, it failed twice in her two main battles to have a significant effect, unlike Washington's or SD's. If we compare SDs engagement with Kirishima and Bismarck's against Rodney/KGV we see that both had their direction/range finders taken out early in the fight, and yet SD scored a number of telling hits with her 16" guns at night (though short range), whereas Bismarck scored no hits in daytime. We are left with the conclusion that the radar etc on the Washington and SD would be quite superior to Tirpitz, and the allied ships would be firing faster and more accurately than the enemy.

Bismarck was blind when her rangefinder was hit. She was also not maneuverable. So she was a good target, nearly as good as a sitting duck. A mobile ship with a working range finder was much better able to avoid being hit and hit the enemy herself. All vital stations on the Bismarck were still intact when she was scuttled despite the hits on her. I just read that her armoured deck was never penetrated and only one 14" shell penetrated the side belt.

Again, I fail to see the point you're making. Intact or otherwise, none of her guns were firing, and she was dead in the water. What relevance is it to repeat that her armour was intact if she ceased to operate? Again I would point to the fact that US ships operated just fine in similar conditions re their firing

On the speculation re the battle, as I mentioned, other light ships were available to the allies, so any scenario would contain this. Any scenario would also be likely to contain the theory that the RN would have fought nearer to Tovey's position than the convoy, ie the cruisers would have been available. Against the Tirpitz you have two better, more accurate ships facing off against her than faced the Bismarck, and you can easily cut that time down to 40 minutes anyway as Bismarck was forced to cease firing long before she was scuttled. You could even cut it down to 26 minutes if you count it to the point were the command and range finding equipment were lost on her. So no, a careful analysis shows that even with two probably inferior ships, the allies wouldn't take as long as you suggest. Even at the time it might take, if the allies injured Tirpitz just slightly in taking out her Radar etc, evidence shows that her class became virtually blinded by it. Do the same to the Washington and in all likelyhood she'll still be pumping 16" shells into you

You mention that the planes damaged a number of other ships, but this is against badly supported, unprotected merchant ships, facing better opposition, at longer ranges than they faced PQ17 at you have to presume that the net result can't have been much greater. Victorious' crews may have been inexperienced, but the chaos they would have caused would have helped to say the least.

Of course this is mere speculation. A battle never fought is another thing than discussing a real battle.n GNBNA I fought several times with a Bismarck class ship and two pocket battleships against two other British battleships and was mostly successfull. So we can only speculate. Neverthless I think a fight against the battleship group would not be an easy task. But I think the Germans would have won it.

That's not the same thing or close to it as this battle, so the results don't matter

On the whole issue about Commerce raiding, to be honest the plans for the German fleet were probably more than this under the likes of plan Z. In that, had it been implemented (IIRC it concluded that it would need at least until 1942 to produce many of it's elements) the German fleet would have had many more significant surface ships which would have been newer, and engaging the RN on a one-one basis would have been much easier than proved in 1939. Fortunately this never came to pass, though it's presumed that the RN would have implemented changes to reflect this.

 

[rilnator]

IIRC plan Z was never due to be finished til 1945, which is when Hitler would have prefered to start the war. But I've always found it hard to imagine that peace would have reigned over Europe for that length of time. Even if they did let him have Poland.