Minor question about Battlecruisers

[Orm]

I apologize. For some reason I do not comprehend, I mistook your post as one from the "relevant party". We were having a bit of fun with each other and I didn't realize you had posted (which is the way things work) and your posts have always been and will always be welcome to me. I request your forgiveness.

I was not offended. So no need to apologize to me. I was merely trying to say that these threads could be visited by others who gets directed to it by a search engine. I am a bit to paranoid at times. So I am the one who should ask forgiveness.

I am sorry.

I hope that we are on good terms.

[geofflambert]

A lot of things hinge on what was politically possible in the US. The US had the capacity, ability and knowhow to build and man CVEs before the US entry into the war. The US was doing a lot of really important things vis-à-vis the UK and USSR but the benefits seem huge to me if we had secured the Atlantic crossing either directly or through the Brits. Decisions had to be made on what Congress would fund and a kind of triage had to happen, and those triage decisions had a large capacity to be critical. It was a very complex situation that can give you headaches even today.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

A lot of things hinge on what was politically possible in the US. The US had the capacity, ability and knowhow to build and man CVEs before the US entry into the war. The US was doing a lot of really important things vis-à-vis the UK and USSR but the benefits seem huge to me if we had secured the Atlantic crossing either directly or through the Brits. Decisions had to be made on what Congress would fund and a kind of triage had to happen, and those triage decisions had a large capacity to be critical. It was a very complex situation that can give you headaches even today.

warspite1

Now I'm lost [&:]

[geofflambert]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

In response to the personage formerly known as "the relevant party", I agree entirely. An aircraft carrier, even a pathetic British one, parked somewhere south of Iceland would probably have been best.

warspite1

Right - so which one of the plethora to choose from - are you going to send? The RN did send the Victorious, the Ark Royal was drafted in from Gibraltar. Are you going to have Argus or Furious permanently stationed off Iceland? What about re-supplying Malta? What about the war in the Med?

I'm not seeing a lot of thought here [&:]

Sir, no one (to my knowledge or recollection) has ever accused me of "thinking". Don't you have some butterflies to feed or something?

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I'm not seeing a lot of thought here [&:]

Indeed. I am not doing much thinking. I am merely asking if the Fleet Command did consider a breakout attempt by Bismarck and what their response should be. To me it seems they either were unprepared or thought the response adequate. And the response was to send a battle cruiser against a battle ship. And you have argued that this is not what the battle cruisers were intended for. So should they not have another battleship ready instead of a battle cruiser?

[geofflambert]

ORIGINAL: Orm

I apologize. For some reason I do not comprehend, I mistook your post as one from the "relevant party". We were having a bit of fun with each other and I didn't realize you had posted (which is the way things work) and your posts have always been and will always be welcome to me. I request your forgiveness.

I was not offended. So no need to apologize to me. I was merely trying to say that these threads could be visited by others who gets directed to it by a search engine. I am a bit to paranoid at times. So I am the one who should ask forgiveness.

I am sorry.

I hope that we are on good terms.

Good terms would be if you were slipping me an Andrew Jackson every week. I know you are not from around here so I will cut you a break, today!

No really, I can't even imagine being on bad terms with you. If you are ever in the area I will buy a package of microwave popcorn. Would you prefer plain, buttered (with fake butter) or buttered with real butter?

No, really, it is quite impossible for you to cause us to be on bad terms, and I'm pretty confident that if I behaved like a complete heel you would forgive me. L'chaim!

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I'm not seeing a lot of thought here [&:]

Indeed. I am not doing much thinking. I am merely asking if the Fleet Command did consider a breakout attempt by Bismarck and what their response should be. To me it seems they either were unprepared or thought the response adequate. And the response was to send a battle cruiser against a battle ship. And you have argued that this is not what the battle cruisers were intended for. So should they not have another battleship ready instead of a battle cruiser?

warspite1

The British only had two modern battleships at that stage of the war - and one of those wasn't fully worked up.

The others were deficient in armour, speed or both.

One question I have asked recently is why both KGV's were not sent. But of course, the likely answer is that you do not send all your assets out at once - in case Bismarck is lost sight of - and these, as said, were the only modern two battleships we possessed.

As to the question of whether the Hood should have faced the Bismarck, then we come to another set of thinking entirely. The Hood was the largest warship in the world for so long, she was more than adequately armed, and we did not have a stunning range of other options.

How would it look if the Bismarck got out - an HMS Hood was found "cowering" at Scapa Flow? I think just as the proper role of the BC was forgotten in WWI, so the shortcomings were ignored in WWII - but in WWII it was out of desperation rather than anything else.

[Orm]

If you are ever in the area I will buy a package of microwave popcorn. Would you prefer plain, buttered (with fake butter) or buttered with real butter?

Thank you. [:)] I would take what is offered and be grateful, and happy, that I was asked to join.

(Never tried buttered popcorn [:D])

If you ever visit Stockholm I would be honoured to meet up.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

In response to the personage formerly known as "the relevant party", I agree entirely. An aircraft carrier, even a pathetic British one, parked somewhere south of Iceland would probably have been best.

warspite1

Right - so which one of the plethora to choose from - are you going to send? The RN did send the Victorious, the Ark Royal was drafted in from Gibraltar. Are you going to have Argus or Furious permanently stationed off Iceland? What about re-supplying Malta? What about the war in the Med?

I'm not seeing a lot of thought here [&:]

Sir, no one (to my knowledge or recollection) has ever accused me of "thinking". Don't you have some butterflies to feed or something?

warspite1

No, my butterfly garden is fully self functioning. No need for human intervention in the feeding process.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I'm not seeing a lot of thought here [&:]

Indeed. I am not doing much thinking. I am merely asking if the Fleet Command did consider a breakout attempt by Bismarck and what their response should be. To me it seems they either were unprepared or thought the response adequate. And the response was to send a battle cruiser against a battle ship. And you have argued that this is not what the battle cruisers were intended for. So should they not have another battleship ready instead of a battle cruiser?

warspite1

The British only had two modern battleships at that stage of the war - and one of those wasn't fully worked up.

The others were deficient in armour, speed or both.

One question I have asked recently is why both KGV's were not sent. But of course, the likely answer is that you do not send all your assets out at once - in case Bismarck is lost sight of - and these, as said, were the only modern two battleships we possessed.

As to the question of whether the Hood should have faced the Bismarck, then we come to another set of thinking entirely. The Hood was the largest warship in the world for so long, she was more than adequately armed, and we did not have a stunning range of other options.

How would it look if the Bismarck got out - an HMS Hood was found cowering at Scapa Flow? I think just as the proper role of the BC was forgotten in WWI, so the shortcomings were ignored in WWII.

Could it be that the tradition of winning against the odds were so strong that RN expected to win regardless of odds? I am not saying that the odds were bad here but they were not overwhelmingly in favour of RN.

Would not the best opportunity to force Bismarck into battle with a slower battleship have been at the Denmark strait?

[geofflambert]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

A lot of things hinge on what was politically possible in the US. The US had the capacity, ability and knowhow to build and man CVEs before the US entry into the war. The US was doing a lot of really important things vis-à-vis the UK and USSR but the benefits seem huge to me if we had secured the Atlantic crossing either directly or through the Brits. Decisions had to be made on what Congress would fund and a kind of triage had to happen, and those triage decisions had a large capacity to be critical. It was a very complex situation that can give you headaches even today.

warspite1

Now I'm lost [&:]

The artist formerly known as the relevant party needs to understand that it is way past my bed time and that he needs to make sure his butterflies are not starving to death, Bye!

[Orm]

One question I have asked recently is why both KGV's were not sent. But of course, the likely answer is that you do not send all your assets out at once - in case Bismarck is lost sight of - and these, as said, were the only modern two battleships we possessed.

It is fortunate that I was not in charge. I would have sent all I got. And I would have been called a lot of foul names if my grand force had missed the target. [:D]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Orm



Indeed. I am not doing much thinking. I am merely asking if the Fleet Command did consider a breakout attempt by Bismarck and what their response should be. To me it seems they either were unprepared or thought the response adequate. And the response was to send a battle cruiser against a battle ship. And you have argued that this is not what the battle cruisers were intended for. So should they not have another battleship ready instead of a battle cruiser?

warspite1

The British only had two modern battleships at that stage of the war - and one of those wasn't fully worked up.

The others were deficient in armour, speed or both.

One question I have asked recently is why both KGV's were not sent. But of course, the likely answer is that you do not send all your assets out at once - in case Bismarck is lost sight of - and these, as said, were the only modern two battleships we possessed.

As to the question of whether the Hood should have faced the Bismarck, then we come to another set of thinking entirely. The Hood was the largest warship in the world for so long, she was more than adequately armed, and we did not have a stunning range of other options.

How would it look if the Bismarck got out - an HMS Hood was found cowering at Scapa Flow? I think just as the proper role of the BC was forgotten in WWI, so the shortcomings were ignored in WWII.

Could it be that the tradition of winning against the odds were so strong that RN expected to win regardless of odds? I am not saying that the odds were bad here but they were not overwhelmingly in favour of RN.

Would not the best opportunity to force Bismarck into battle with a slower battleship have been at the Denmark strait?

warspite1

But then that means you don't send slower battleships on other missions because you know you will need to fight them in the Denmark Strait.

But how would the British know when Bismarck would sail, how did they know the ships would take the Denmark Strait route? how did the British know that they would intercept the ships in the Denmark Strait?

What if the Bismarck had evaded her pursuers (like others had done previously - Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Hipper, Scheer) and got into the Atlantic sea lanes?

There was simply too many variables, too many threats - and not enough ships of the right size, speed, armour and fire-power to cover all bases.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

But then that means you don't send slower battleships on other missions because you know you will need to fight them in the Denmark Strait.

But how would the British know when Bismarck would sail, how did they know the ships would take the Denmark Strait route? how did the British know that they would intercept the ships in the Denmark Strait?

What if the Bismarck had evaded her pursuers (like others had done previously - Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Hipper, Scheer) and got into the Atlantic sea lanes?

There was simply too many variables, too many threats - and not enough ships of the right size, speed, armour and fire-power to cover all bases.

Now you steal some of my questions. [:D]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

But then that means you don't send slower battleships on other missions because you know you will need to fight them in the Denmark Strait.

But how would the British know when Bismarck would sail, how did they know the ships would take the Denmark Strait route? how did the British know that they would intercept the ships in the Denmark Strait?

What if the Bismarck had evaded her pursuers (like others had done previously - Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Hipper, Scheer) and got into the Atlantic sea lanes?

There was simply too many variables, too many threats - and not enough ships of the right size, speed, armour and fire-power to cover all bases.

Now you steal some of my questions. [:D]

Warspite1

Well as the Gorn said, you could always send a rubbish carrier. But that would need yet another battleship or two (that we haven't got) in support, as the rubbish British carriers were too slow to run if caught - and there would just be another Glorious episode. Meantime the defence of Malta can go hang because the aircraft re-supply would have to stop....

[Orm]

Yes. I get that the RN had lot of priorities. With hindsight, to me, it looks like they prioritised something wrong. Not that they had easy choices to make.

But, since you know a lot more than me, say that they didn't, then I will concede to your wisdom. [&o]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Orm

Yes. I get that the RN had lot of priorities. With hindsight, to me, it looks like they prioritised something wrong. Not that they had easy choices to make.

But, since you know a lot more than me, say that they didn't, then I will concede to your wisdom. [&o]

warspite1

But I'm not saying they didn't. I am saying that with hindsight I would have sent both KGV's and Victorious. Why? Because I know that Bismarck is going to be found and I know that otherwise Hood is going to be sunk!

What a genius I am [:)]

But without hindsight, and with the need to try and cover off all eventualities - and save Malta ...and save Crete (where the RN without air cover is getting a pounding trying to save the army for the umpteenth time in the war so far).... and protect the shipping lanes.... and getting reinforcements to the Med..... and worry about other surface raiders not just Bismarck..... and all of this with forces that in many cases were not fit for purpose.....

I would get things wrong too.....

[Orm]

I would get things wrong too.....

No, you wouldn't. [:)]

[BBfanboy]

Bismarck was not the only threat to shipping in the North Atlantic. Germany had Scharnhorst and Gneisenau at Brest and two pocket battleships that could sortie at any time. Some of the fleet had to keep to Scapa Flow as the central position to intercept any further breakout attempts.

It should also be understood that the British had to cover three potential breakout paths from the area north of Britain into the Atlantic - they had no contact with the German squadron after it left the fjord in Norway so they sent cruisers to picket all three passages and the only fast capital ships they could spare to position south of Iceland, ready to move to whichever passage the Germans used. And they did not get confirmation that the Germans had left Norway until at least 24 hours after their departure (weather prevented recon flights), so they were running late when Bismarck was found in the Denmark Strait. Had they known exactly when the Germans moved they could have been waiting at the strait exit, crossing the T rather than charging head on at the Germans.

As for Hood standing off and hitting Bismarck, her gunnery was not great in the actual battle - it was Prince of Wales that scored the hit through the bow that caused contamination of a fuel tank and forced Bismarck to head for port instead of looking for convoys. Unfortunately PoW's guns kept malfunctioning and she was down to just two operating 14" guns when Capt. Leach broke off the battle. PoW also received three hits from Bismarck and four from Prinz Eugen which messed up the bridge and IIRC, the rangefinders. To say she could have stayed and fought is unrealistic.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Bismarck was not the only threat to shipping in the North Atlantic. Germany had Scharnhorst and Gneisenau at Brest and two pocket battleships that could sortie at any time. Some of the fleet had to keep to Scapa Flow as the central position to intercept any further breakout attempts.

It should also be understood that the British had to cover three potential breakout paths from the area north of Britain into the Atlantic - they had no contact with the German squadron after it left the fjord in Norway so they sent cruisers to picket all three passages and the only fast capital ships they could spare to position south of Iceland, ready to move to whichever passage the Germans used. And they did not get confirmation that the Germans had left Norway until at least 24 hours after their departure (weather prevented recon flights), so they were running late when Bismarck was found in the Denmark Strait. Had they known exactly when the Germans moved they could have been waiting at the strait exit, crossing the T rather than charging head on at the Germans.

As for Hood standing off and hitting Bismarck, her gunnery was not great in the actual battle - it was Prince of Wales that scored the hit through the bow that caused contamination of a fuel tank and forced Bismarck to head for port instead of looking for convoys. Unfortunately PoW's guns kept malfunctioning and she was down to just two operating 14" guns when Capt. Leach broke off the battle. PoW also received three hits from Bismarck and four from Prinz Eugen which messed up the bridge and IIRC, the rangefinders. To say she could have stayed and fought is unrealistic.

warspite1

There was a plan for the Ugly Sisters to take part in Rheinubung but both had been damaged in RAF raids a short while previously. But yes, as said in my earlier post, Bismarck was not the only surface raider that the RN needed to worry about.....