Warships of the World

Kraut · Post by **Kraut** » Sat Nov 23, 2002 4:51 am

This is a pretty exhaustive data-base

http://www.warships1.com/

CCB · Post by **CCB** » Sat Nov 23, 2002 5:17 am

So who sank HMS Hood? Prinz Eugen or Bismarck?

Sgt.Striker · Post by **Sgt.Striker** » Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:50 am

Bismark. A 15 inch shell penetrated the magazine of the hood

CCB · Post by **CCB** » Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:10 pm

That seems to be the popular theory, though I have heard that it was actually a plunging shot from one of Eugen's guns.

Kraut · Post by **Kraut** » Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:33 pm

I'm no expert on this, but lack of protection against plunging shots is supposed to have been the deciding factor.

Sgt.Striker · Post by **Sgt.Striker** » Sat Nov 23, 2002 9:40 pm

but do you think a 8 inch shell could do it?

CCB · Post by **CCB** » Sat Nov 23, 2002 9:54 pm

Yes, if its a plunging shot, which is more likely to come from one of Eugen's 8" guns than from one of Bismarck's 15" guns. But its only a theory and one that's very hotly debated at that!

rockymtndoc · Post by **rockymtndoc** » Sun Nov 24, 2002 12:11 am

Be sure to watch James Cameron's special presentation on Dec 8th: Bismarck!

I imagine he'll address that issue.

CCB · Post by **CCB** » Sun Nov 24, 2002 2:38 am

I've recently viewed one documentary on PBS where they dived on the Bismarck and Hood. The Hood's bow and stern where torn off and the main part of the ship was upside down.

They also did a more exporation on the Bismarck than Ballard did. They found something like four torpedo holes in her that had been delivered from British surface ships during the final battle. They couldn't however find any evidence that the Bismarck's crew had tried to scuttle the ship. But the report stated that even if they did try, it only speed up the inevitable.

Waylander · Post by **Waylander** » Sun Nov 24, 2002 11:37 pm

All the stuff I have read over the last 4-5 years seems to lean more towards Eugen as being the culprit. maybe its just a fashionable theory, but an 8" shell could certainly do this to Hood's relatively thin armour, if, as was noted, it was a plunging shot. Regardless of who did the dirty deed, both got there come-uppance, Bismark shortly after, and Eugen in Atom bomb tests after the war.
The plain fact was that the battlecruiser concept never really worked, as was demonstrated at Dogger bank, Jutland (there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today)and by the "mighty" hood's sad demise.

reagrds
Waylander

Kraut · Post by **Kraut** » Mon Nov 25, 2002 12:11 am

Originally posted by Waylander
All the stuff I have read over the last 4-5 years seems to lean more towards Eugen as being the culprit. maybe its just a fashionable theory, but an 8" shell could certainly do this to Hood's relatively thin armour, if, as was noted, it was a plunging shot. Regardless of who did the dirty deed, both got there come-uppance, Bismark shortly after, and Eugen in Atom bomb tests after the war.
The plain fact was that the battlecruiser concept never really worked, as was demonstrated at Dogger bank, Jutland (there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today)and by the "mighty" hood's sad demise.

reagrds
Waylander

Dirty deed? This was simply war.

Sgt.Striker · Post by **Sgt.Striker** » Mon Nov 25, 2002 12:26 am

You have to wonder how the Finest navy at the time came up with such a bad concept and then failed to use there white elephants correctly (Big Cruisers)

Kraut · Post by **Kraut** » Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:13 am

Originally posted by Sgt.Striker
You have to wonder how the Finest navy at the time came up with such a bad concept and then failed to use there white elephants correctly (Big Cruisers)

Properly used they could have been advantageous; less expensive than battleships they could have been built in larger numbers to cover more ocean, a bonus for apprehending transports.

sven · Post by **sven** » Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:14 am

Originally posted by Kraut

Dirty deed? This was simply war.

sort of contradicts your stand on the Argie b UK battle there guy...

Sgt.Striker · Post by **Sgt.Striker** » Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:15 am

exactly,or for making sure the surface raiders stayed away,and running from the battleships.

Kraut · Post by **Kraut** » Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:21 am

Originally posted by sven

sort of contradicts your stand on the Argie b UK battle there guy...

Not quite, the Argentine battleship was no direct threat to the British sub, but the Hood was a real and direct threat to the Bismarck (the possible contradiction occured to me before I wrote this, but the difference in situations justifies my post above.

(Evil smile)

Besides, I already had learned my lesson form you guys

Sgt.Striker · Post by **Sgt.Striker** » Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:23 am

here we go again,can't we just talked about what happened and not why it happened. lol

sven · Post by **sven** » Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:24 am

Originally posted by Sgt.Striker
here we go again,can't we just talked about what happened and not why it happened. lol

You misunderstand my intent, and Kraut read me loud and clear.

I am very much a "what happened" kind of guy.

Kraut · Post by **Kraut** » Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:24 am

Originally posted by Sgt.Striker
exactly,or for making sure the surface raiders stayed away,and running from the battleships.

I can easily imagine ships of that size that would have been faster than battleships and at the same time more powerful than cruisers.

Sgt.Striker · Post by **Sgt.Striker** » Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:29 am

Sorry Svend.it just seems to be that every post seems to become a left wing vs Right wing battlegroud,lol all bout deep issues like morality and justification. And of course hindsight is ..................

Warships of the World

Warships of the World

Hood

Re: Hood

Re: Re: Hood

Re: Re: Re: Hood