I can't believe the germans could sacrifice so much metal resources during war time into one project, the amount of Tanks, Detroyers weapons, amunition they could have made with the 50.000 tons of Metals and other materials, this had to be Hitler showing the world Germans might because their was no other reason to construct this, it proves he did not know how to utilise his materials, no wonder the germans ran out of well needed materials near the end of the war.
@zigazig1980 You’re greatly overlooking some facts & jumping to a naive conclusion.
1 the Bismarcks displacement was 50,400 tons, thats not how much she weighed.
2 your opinion is based of the benefit of hindsight. In the 1930s when most of Nazi Germany's ships were designed & commissioned, large battleships had over 80 years of battle proven ability to be very effective. The effects of aircraft on large ships was unproven at the time. With the knowledge of the day Germany was wise.
Germans were stupid developing battleships.They knew future was aircraft so whats the point to build one big target easy to find and hit?Third Reich could build 20 Leberecht Maas destroyers( turned into AA ships,each had 2,500 tons) or 50 Class VII U-boats (each had 879 tones much better to kill convoys) instead of one big Bismarck that was 50000 tons heavy.I'm not naval engineer so its pure math now.Bismarck and pocket batleships were waisting resources-future were carriers destroyers and subs
@garden2010city Read my comment to zigazig1980. I echo what I wrote to him/her at you.
Seriously guys, if you are gunna criticize someone or a group of people, you should at least know what you are talking about. It's like getting mad & criticizing the commander of Pearl Harbor saying you should've known the Japs were coming. You two sound as if you expected people back then to be psychic.
Wounder how many U-Boats the Germans could have made instead of the Bismarck, using the resources that went into its construction to produce more subs for the wolf-packs.
isn't the Bismarck just about the sexiest battleship ever built? <3 i love the curves and shapes of her body so much and the Baltic camouflage painting is so fu*** badass.
I thought i said countries..... not specks on the map ;-P
I'm sorry I couldn't resist :)
I'm in 2 frames of mind, if they are guilty but are with-holding information then they should be "persuaded" to be more talkative, on the other hand things like torture should be used as a means of punishment.... I mean is something done by savages in he past.....
Hood was never build to attack Battleships her job was to attack heavy cruisers,destroyers or carriers, Hood had no change to beat bismarck, she could never get bismarck's shots,Bismarck was more armored,stronger guns,better built,Hood had no change to beat bismarck..
I believe fascism would still have the conditions without the Versailles Treaty to grow in Germany.
though the question is, would there be Globalism without the undermining of U.S. Sovereignty and distain for ( U.S. ) our posterity by paying off to have treaties since WWII
me personally I'm not so sure. Germany was forced to take the whole blame for the war, and was punished accordingly. They had the second largest fleet at the start, at the end they were allowed to have a couple of pre-dreadnoughts. They went from a first rate nation to a second class nation. they lost territories etc To me that was the major contributer to the second world war.
add a couple of political power vacuums and the global depression........
If you like this watch "The death of the japanese navy". You'll love it and they "DO" mention the US navy. The Yamato's weight alone is more than the weight of the US's fleet of destroyer they fight. Propaganda this. Thanks for the show.
And how many surface actions against enemy surface units did she participate in?
How many times was she bombed/torpedoed?
Its all good and well to have a battleship that on paper is impressive. Its a totally different one to prove it in real life. Theoretical can at times be completely different to real life results.
very true, once the plane came of sufficient age, the game changed. The plane can carry its payload of hurt further inland, provide better protection and support. Aircraft time and time again proved how even though they are little they can do alot of damage. Against Bismarck, against POW, the italian fleet, Pearl Habor, Yamato. Just to name a few. Though me personally I'd build a model of a Battleship before a Carrier :)
And they were also cheaper, less amour, relying upon its own fighters for the primary protection instead of inches and inches of steal which will eventually be penetrated by bigger and bigger bombs (Tallboy against Tirpiz).
YOU FUCKING BRITISHERS, GERMANY WILL GET ANOTHER GREAT LEADER LIKE HITLER & WILL BUILT MORE POWERFUL SHIP LIKE BISMARK, THEN WE WILL GET YOU AGAIN YOU ASS HOLES, YOU CONTROL MEDIA OF ALL WORLD & TELL NEGATIVE NEWS..& SPREAD HATE, NUDITY & VIOLENCE....YOU HAIRS OF QUEENS PUSSY...FUCK YOU LL ENGLISH MEN & WOMEN,,,,I HATE YOU MOTHERS FUCKER..HEL HITLER & GERMANY, WE DON'T START WORLD WAR YOU UK * USA START IT, FDR REPORT SAYS THAT US ATTACK ITS OWN SOIL PERAL HARBOUR, U DISHONEST COUNTRY PEOPLE,,
@iroscoe thats a joke, lol Germany a super power they have no idea what weapons the United States poccess, plus you Brits are the grandchildren of the men that held them back alone, I would say you have the same genectic predisposition we do, to stop evil doers. That dude must be insane, lol, what a rant.
Well you have started 2 world wars. We have started...erm....none. You invaded Poland in ww2, and asassinated the french president in ww1. I would say that is pretty good evidence of you german fuck tards starting the wars. ww2 was being fought 3 years before pearl harbour you stupid nazi ass wipe.
lol both Germany AND Russia invaded Poland, Germany assisinating the French president in WW1... i'd have to say I've never heard that one before.
I'm def not a nazi or even remotely support nazism, but the truth is alot of countries have either started wars, or colonised the world through force.
It was Yamato. Although the Bismark was in service 3 years before Yamato was commissioned. Also the Yamato engaged allied vessels only once before her kamikazi mission. The japs frequently pulled yamato off the frontline during a confrontaition through fear of losing her. Therefore Yamato was larger, but Bismark saw more action. Another point..the British built equal size guns to Yamato on HMS Furious twenty years before ww2. Although the British saw the massive guns as unnecessary.
My dad served on Hood until his transfer to HMS Kylemore, just a month before Hood's sinking. He lost many good friends. Six months later, Kylemore met her fate too, at the hands of German Dorniers, & my dad was one of only 8 survivors. He was awarded the DSM for courageous conduct during & after the sinking. The medal was pinned on his chest by Lord Mountbatten.
Another joke was the "legal limits" for battleship sizes. LOLOL Legal limits? That's like have a speed limit for race cars. The Biz was over 50,000 tons. What were the Brits going to do? Pull them over with a fleet of ships and give them a ticket? LOLOL Rules of War. #1...there are no rules.
It was the treaty of versailles signed after world war one stating that germay were alowed only limited millitay capability and only to be used in defense of germany and not for agressive motives. This was punishment to germany for plunging the world into all out war that cost millions of lives. Hitler had to keep his millitary strength under wraps untill the right moment as Britain and France could have easily stoped him in his tracks if they found out while germany was still weak.
@tyme4mike The Washington Treaty came about after WWI because the battleship and battlecruiser were the "nuclear" weapons of the day and like nuclear weapons today, were used as the primary weapons systems for deterrence. It makes sense as to why they did it.
Germany had no choice with the treaty of Versailles, under the anglo-german agreement 1935 from memory (which meant that germany had to follow the washington treaty but allowed them to build larger ships and a bigger anvy) by the time she was built the treaty had been voided by the japanese, so bismarck was legal.
I never understood why the Brits had their heads up their arses over the Hood. They knew her wooden deck was the biggest thorn-in-the-side of any Battleship on the sea, yet they sent her out like she was invincible when she should have been harbored to have a new deck installed. One shot took it to the bottom. It was simply a dumb move no matter how you look at it. Damn, they had the Rodney, the King George V, the Prince of Wales, the Repulse, etc..etc..the Hood was an unnecessary sacrifice.
@tyme4mike Unfortunately, the Hood wasnt a battleship. she is a battlecruiser, built for speed and not hitting power. she was built for hit and run and not to stand toe-to-toe with the then biggest battleship ever built. but i agree, why didn't we just send our battleships after Bismark I will never know. I can only imagine they tried to beat hitting power with sheer speed.
what do you mean wooden deck? Hood did not have a wooden deck, and as I keep saying at the range Hood was fatally hit by Bismarck (if that was what caused the explosion) given the characteristics of Bismarcks guns, the shell would had to have penetrated VERTICLE amour to penetrate vital areas, NOT horizontal amour.
@notsureyou sorry, but the shell hit on the top of Hood's deck. Hood had enough armour on the sides to survive a hit. She would'nt be in good condition, but she would survive. Being a battle cruiser with the armor of a cruiser, and being from WWI where battles were fought at closer ranges, the armor, where she was hit, she was penetrated instantly.
not true, at the range Hood was hit Bismarck could penetrate the side amour of EVERY ww2 (so modern) battleship. kbismarck which has a penetration table for Bismarcks guns, show that at 17km her guns could penetrate 460mm and that is modern amour ww2 standard not ww1 standard, Hood was hit at a tad over 15km. Whats interesting is that the table gives no figure for deck penetration below 22km.
It was because of her legend. She was the fastest, most powerful battleship in the word during ww1. She notched up victory after victory, and in doing so, became a British icon of sea power. Much the same as if Britain recalled the Spitfire back to active service today. The Spitfire would not stand much of a chance against a modern jet. But the sight of it flying over Britain would inspire courage and fearlessnes into the British people and millitary personel. Thats what Hood was for
I think you mean in the inter-war period, since HMS HOOD was not completed until 1920. But She was loved by the British people, and was seen as the embodiment of naval power (like a aircraft carrier is today). She never fought in ww1 (since she was completed 2 years after ww1 finished), and never (to my knowledge) fought a proper naval battle until her battle with the Bismarck.
I stand corrected my friend. She fought in the Italian Abyssinian War, and the Spanish civil war. I was thinking of those wars leading up to ww1 insted of ww2. My mistake. But my initial point is still valid. She was there to serve as an inspiration to the fleet and the British population back home.
@tyme4mike We must first take into consideration if those battleships were even available to intercept Bismarck. But I'm pretty sure they had a few battleships that were free. I do agree that sending out Hood was a foolish decision, but I do hate it that the Brits got hot-headed that a german battleship sank their flagship. It was their choice to send out a warship to battle with another one which had clearly out-classed it, and so they'd payed the price.
@TheWoodstock2009 Part of it too was the Yamato was closely guarded during its construction to keep its full specifications a secret. Somewhat of an irony considering how much of a non-factor it ultimately played in the war.
No they were not. In early 1941. Yamato was not commissioned. Therefore Bismarck was the largest battleship in the world. Not by length however, as HMS Hood was actually 2 meters longer. She was the largest by width, tonnage, and firepower. Yamato was not commissioned until December 1941...
@MrDeano324 In military terms the length of a warship isn't a factor in determining the largest warship. I'm a navy vet and it's interesting how the civilian world puts so much emphasis on the length of a ship when its displacement is what determines what ship is largest.
Bizmark was definitely one of the most advanced capital ships in the world. The Hood was unfortunately outclassed in that surface action.
Not really. This documentary is detailing events that occured in early to mid 1941. The sinking of Hood at the Denmark straight. And the subsequent sinking of Bismark by British ww1 era bi-planes. All of which occured before the world even had an inkling of Yamato. Therefore saying, "the most powerful warship", is indeed correct.
@MrDeano324 The North Carolinas had the Bismarck beaten in both armour and throw weight of salvos. USS North Carolina was launched in 1940 and commissioned April 1941.
@notsureyou I would need to see specifics regarding the radar range. In any case, it was effective enough to critically damage, in very short order, the Kirishima in the middle of the night.
I digress though, my point is that until the launch of the Yamato and Iowa, there was no single ship that was clearly ahead of the others. Bismarck had relatively thin armour for her size and was evidently vulnerable to the 16" guns of Rodney.
the radar originally fitted to NC could detect a large ship at 23km, B radar had an effective range of 25km and had a tolerance of +/- 50m, but NO PPI. The engagement you mentioned happened in late 1942 and occured at 5.3km.
Belt thickness on B was thicker than on NC but only 50% of it was sloped and didnt extend to the keel. NC had a fully sloped belt which extended to the keel (though getting thinner the deeper it went).
When Rodney opened fire the range was between 20-23km, Bismarck was hit nearly 20min later which according to the plot map on the site kbismarck gives a range of circa 14km. At that range EVERY battleship is going to have issues with Rodney's 16inch shells. After Bismarcks guns were silenced Rodney closed to between 2.5km and 4km and continue to hammer away at Bismarck.
NC v's B would def be an epic fight, the 2700 pound shells would give NC an big advantage, given the push for the americans to rely on radar for radar controlled gunnery a night engagment would be the most ideal situation for NC.
During day time would be fairly even, the germans mainly relied on optical range finders and bracket firing which def worked.
Lady luck also cannot be forgoten and could play a part either way with either ship scoring a critical hit early on.
Yamato was made to destroy any battleship at a stand off range and why would it have ARmor resist only for 14 inch Guns if she was fighting battleships like North Carolina??? she prob had armor that could resist more than 14 and prob more than 18 inch from a long shot..!!!
@BlackDHbatman what most dont know about yamato, is that her armor was 16in thick, but wasnt as strong as german KC or british CA armor of the time. she also suffered from a very weak joint between the main armor belt and the lower belt. post war testing showed that German KC armor was only slightly less resiliant than british CA armor, and superior to US Class A armor plating. the point im trying to make is Yamato's armor was heavy to make up for the armor issues.
It isnt true the way they say that the Bismarck was the largest battleship in the world. The Hood was 33 ft. Longer (Hood was 860 ft. long, Bismarck was only 823 ft. long)
Hood is not a BATTLESHIP, she was a BATTLECRUISER, though extra amour was added during construction. the truth though is that Hood is an in-between ship, designed to be the ultimate Battlecruiser (bigger, more powerful, and faster than previous BC's) she should not have gone up against anything bigger than a heavy cruiser. but since she appeared to be big and powerful she was used where she shouldnt have, and her luck unfortunently ran out (RIP all aboard).
@MisterCyber1 they are refering to her sheer weight. only one battleship weighed more, Yamato, and she isnt finished yet, nor are the iowas. thats why they called her the largest warship aflot. she also had the highest armor to weight ratio of any battleship. keep in mind too, she was fast. 31 knots, the iowas only managed 33-34knots. also, she was a stepping stone ship. the H39 class was the next one in line.
She did have a high armor to weight ratio yes. However the armor layout was obsolete. Multiple armored decks, a single torpedo bulkhead, and heavily armored forward conning tower. I understand Bismarck could go faster that the design speed of 30 knots. I don't know about 31 knots. The Iowas could theoretically reach 34 knots, but I have never seen a written report stating that had been done.
the main issues with Bismarcks amour layout is more the fact that the designers tried to stick amour on pretty much everything. Instead of having the all or nothing principle and the 4 turret design. the 4 turret design means a greater portion of the hull is protected, but that extra weight could have been used to improve deck amour.
the single torpedo bulkhead work against torpedos, and it did manage to prevent the 14inch shell from POW from entering the citadel.
I have to say bismarck is kind of outdated because its old weaponry. Yamato and the iowa class could beat it well. Even the South Dakota class could beat it. But the germans kind of cheated using a super weapon. Or maybe he just hit the magazine. I don't get that part.
with the radar that the US had in 1940 and early 1941 it wouldnt be as easy as you believe. IOWA (if finished in may 1941) maybe, her speed advantage would allow her to control the battle, Yamato yes due to sheer amount of amour, NC or SD, well NC was only designed to resist 14inch shells (what her main armament was originally intended to be) so I wouldnt put bet the farm, id say SD has more of a chance than NC. Once better radar, well......
@pointy2, i am well aware of the uboat issues. ive dedicated years of my life into learning as much as possible about them. they could dive deeper than their counterparts, and their torpeados were far more reliable and even had acustic warheads on them. the type XXI was going to change the game, and would have, but mr hitler drug his feet like he did on the ME 262. ever heard of Albrecht? read up on that and every other bit of info you can find on the uboats before slandering them.
Cheap junk? The Spitfire, the P51 the B17 the Iowa class battleships, the Battle class destroyers, the KGV class battleships? The first computers that helped crack Japanese and german ciphers, Radar that could be carried on aircraft by 1942 and accurate enought for accurate blind firing which the Germans never did? Do you know what the chances were for a german sub surviving its first patrol by 1944? No idea what books your reading but they are wrong!
The story of the war is that the Germans were outgunned in technology. The war was a constant leap-frogging of technological innovation - and the allies won that battle! The irony of this battle was that the Bismarck was sunk by out-of-date airplanes.
mainly because in 1940 Hitler stopped all projects that couldnt be completed in 6 months.......... because he believed that the war would be over by then....................... The germans were not so much outgunned in technology as they were outnumbered, and with morons in leadership the end result is going to be failure, but as i heard in one documentary "Stupid people start wars, and stupid people run wars, and rarely listen to those fighting the war"
The Germans were not really outgunned in technology, they shot themselves in the foot majorly when Hitler stopped the development and research of technology (like radar) that couldnt be completed in 6 months, in 1940 because he believed the war would be won by the end of the year.
They were out numbered, they didnt have effective allies, they had deluded people at the top who had no idea what they were really doing (like Goering), what other result could there be?
@kevinastraw question for you sir. would you mind pointing me to the evidence she was sunk by airplanes? she clearly was not. they did cripple her steering gear with a lucky shot. i would disagree with you that the allies won the technology war. we were and still are years behind the germans. we won because we could produce alot of cheep junk and overwhelm the germans. their tanks, ships, subs, machine guns were and still are way ahead of ours. hell, our abrams uses a german main gun.
@akulaknight Luck?,theres no such thing,luck doesn't build aircraft carriers(a weapons system the Germans never produced)nor does it train aircrew that can get airborne in the conditions the Ark Royal was experiencing and then deliver torpedoes on target .
@iroscoe really? perhaps you have never heard of the graf zepplin. true she wasnt commisioned, but she possesed major leaps in carrier tech that we didnt have untill after the war. the saddest part is she never had aircraft built for her, and thats why hitler abandoned construction on her. @ pointy2, the KGV had issues with their complex turrets, and the germans had aircraft radar. ever heard of the condor? the gato class would have been ripped apart too in the same situation.
@akulaknight Ive heard of it but discounted it as it never saw service past being a lumber store then target practice for the Soviets,as for it possesing major leaps in carrier tech what were they casemated guns?....
@iroscoe she had 2 Voith-Schneider cycloidal propeller-rudders used for helping the ship dock, and low speed maneuvering. she had 2 catapults allowing her to launch 18 aircraft in 30 second intervals. she also possesed 4 arresting cables, and 2 more emergency cables closer to the bow. most of these would later appear on carriers in the jet age. its a shame hitler was to arrogant to see what he had sitting in front of him.
@akulaknight Cycloidal propellers are alright if you lack tugs i suppose,18 aircraft at 30 second intervals sounds great in theory but we will never know what they would of acheived in practice...besides using catapults and arrestor gear is hardly proof of German innovation as both the British and Americans did far more to develop those technologies .
but the problem with her catapults, is that they used compressed air, not steam........... which took a long time to recharge when the feeder tank was empty.
And it was more so goering who put up resistance to the carrier.
@123456789mischief Indeed it was. I thought I would have had my last cigarette that day. Part of me wishes I went down with her...I was lucky to be picked up as only few of the thousands of sailors were--As if it was some sort of sick lottery.
funny 2 months ago you said you served on graf Spee so which is it? the below is what you wrote 2 months ago. "watch who you are speaking to , i served on board the Graf Spee and every member on board was recued by the Royal Navy and we all knew we would do the same . the British Navy and Kriegsmarine repected each other . i dont appreciated smart-mouthed kids like you acting as if you know everything about the war . swinehunde"
my bad with NATO, i was quoting from memory, the NATO issue had to do with re-unification where alot of countries were a little more at ease with germany being one again, if they continued to be part of NATO
So why do you see Germany as a threat?
Germany is in a joint military development alliance with several of its neighbours, they have exported tanks to many of its neighbours.
germany is no longer a threat because the youth do not care. the french and german youth do not hate each other. they have no 'unresolved issues' with each other. for them that was the past, today is the future.
here are some numbers for you guys. the german 38cm (15 in) guns used on bismarck were better at penetrating armor than the IJN 18.1 in guns. according to armor penetration charts, at 20,000 yds bismarck could punch through 16.9 inches of armor, yamato at the same range could only muster 13.8. and the british 14's used on king george at 20,000 yds was 15.2 in. bismarcks muzzle velocity was 2,690 ft/sec , yamato 2,300 ft/sec, and the king george 2,300 ft/sec. bismarck wins in muzzle energy
sorry to disagree with you, but at 20,000 yards yamato penetrates 19.8inches not 13.8inches. And since the bismarck used a higher muzzle velocity and a lighter shell, her deck amour penetration wasnt anywhere near as good as other guns except the italian 15inch gun, which had even higher muzzle velocity to bismarck.
the bismarck was a top line battleship. but 1 ship can't do the job of many never should have been sent out the way it was with no support.the Kriegsmarne was not like it was in 1916.
Japanese battleship Yamato is more beauiful and powerful than bismarck. But i pitied those two warships, if only there is one superpower who can make again those powerful warship with a lot of modifications and modernize armaments, like rail guns instead of ballistics, Gatling gun instead of machine gun, lasers and missiles. I think it would match an aircraft carrier with ease. And NAME them as USS BISMARCK AND USS YAMATO.
@razorsharpview9090 the reason they say bismarck is the most powerful warship afloat is that in may of 1941, bismarck was. yamato would not become a commisioned ship untill december of 1941. so at the time of bismarcks maiden voyage, she was the most powerful battleship opperational at the time. bismarck is the only battleship to have 40% of her displament be armor weight. yamato only had 33% of her weight was armor. i agree that both are beautiful ships.
@Bare36 "Bismarck is not underguned by eny battleship in history.it had the best cannons ever put on a ship,even today..germans put just 8 guns on her with a good reason,it was firing more projectiles every minute"??????? don't you know the 16"/50 caliber Mark 7 gun of the USS Iowa? 9 of these firing AP Mark 8: 2,700 lb. (1,225 kg) Shell.. do you think bismark is not underguned?
@iroscoe And that in a nutshell sums up the whole downfall of the massive ship idea, yes the Bismarck sunk the British flagship the Hood however it was critically damaged in that battle by the Hood's smaller escort the Prince of Wales, that damage set in motion the chain of events that would bring about the Bismarck's destruction, ships don't win sea battles navy's do.
@llynellyn Indeed,one suspects that building a flotilla of long legged light cruisers with the resources squandered on Bismarck and Tirpitz would of served the Kriegsmarine surface fleet much better .
U-boats would be incapable in protecting the Bismarck. On the surface, their deck guns would be ineffective and submerged they couldn't pace with the suface ships.
Not when it can't keep pace with surface ships and their ever changing direction as they take evasive maneuvers. For a torpedo to strike its target, the sub crew must calculate lead, speed, etc. and hope that the target doesn't change course. I think your confusing modern submarine warfare with the capabilities of the WW II German u-boat. As escort vessals, WW II era submarines are useless. That's why navies build destroyers, frigates and corvettes. Your knowledge is lacking.
Yes they do but again, when thet target ships are faster that a submerged sub and they keep changing directions to avoid enemy shell fire, you're never going to get a firing solution. During WW II, when subs do sink capital ships, the ships are not taking radical evasive maneuvers and the sub crew have time to get into position for a proper firing solution. The sinking of the Japanese battleship, Kongo, is a good example of this.
though the germans at the end of the war did have a sub that was capable of doing 17knots submerged, the current destroyers (for that time period) could do over 30 knots.
Yes. In fact I think the Germans were the first to invent them. They had acoustic and magnetic homing torpedos but they weren't the precise weapons as those that exist today. You still had to calculate speed, lead, etc. The German type XXI u-boat was developed to late to be of any use in the war but it became the basis for the USS Nautilus. By the way, the fastest subs of WW II were the Japanese Sentaka class (I-201class) which could do 35 knots submerged.
I had vaguley heard about the I-201, though apparently from what ive just read their max speed was only 19knots (the original planned was 35knots), but that is still faster than the XXI only by just under 2 knots, but faster is faster :)
though the german could dive deeper (they list crush depth as 280m, though in the game silent hunter 2 its a little over 300 :) )
i'd imagine ships would be advanced enough not to have to fire broadside. design ships to fire forward and backward as well. it would screw the T formation tactic.
it's not the most powerful and largest ship afloat.. It's the YAMATO class battleship.. BISMARK is also under-gun by US battleships North Carolina, South Dakota, and Iowa Classes..
I can't believe the germans could sacrifice so much metal resources during war time into one project, the amount of Tanks, Detroyers weapons, amunition they could have made with the 50.000 tons of Metals and other materials, this had to be Hitler showing the world Germans might because their was no other reason to construct this, it proves he did not know how to utilise his materials, no wonder the germans ran out of well needed materials near the end of the war.
zigazig1980 3 days ago
@zigazig1980 You’re greatly overlooking some facts & jumping to a naive conclusion.
1 the Bismarcks displacement was 50,400 tons, thats not how much she weighed.
2 your opinion is based of the benefit of hindsight. In the 1930s when most of Nazi Germany's ships were designed & commissioned, large battleships had over 80 years of battle proven ability to be very effective. The effects of aircraft on large ships was unproven at the time. With the knowledge of the day Germany was wise.
JimmyG228 2 days ago
Germans were stupid developing battleships.They knew future was aircraft so whats the point to build one big target easy to find and hit?Third Reich could build 20 Leberecht Maas destroyers( turned into AA ships,each had 2,500 tons) or 50 Class VII U-boats (each had 879 tones much better to kill convoys) instead of one big Bismarck that was 50000 tons heavy.I'm not naval engineer so its pure math now.Bismarck and pocket batleships were waisting resources-future were carriers destroyers and subs
garden2010city 3 days ago
@garden2010city Read my comment to zigazig1980. I echo what I wrote to him/her at you.
Seriously guys, if you are gunna criticize someone or a group of people, you should at least know what you are talking about. It's like getting mad & criticizing the commander of Pearl Harbor saying you should've known the Japs were coming. You two sound as if you expected people back then to be psychic.
JimmyG228 2 days ago
Wounder how many U-Boats the Germans could have made instead of the Bismarck, using the resources that went into its construction to produce more subs for the wolf-packs.
PANZERDRIVER1 4 days ago
1 Ton? They're practically firing Volkswagens at the Hood!
gruntythe1andonly 5 days ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
If you like to watch documentary films on YouTube then visit HOTDOCUMENTARIES,COM
wolawl1 2 weeks ago
isn't the Bismarck just about the sexiest battleship ever built? <3 i love the curves and shapes of her body so much and the Baltic camouflage painting is so fu*** badass.
xAlexTobiasxB 1 month ago 4
@SouthGeorgiaIsland25
I thought i said countries..... not specks on the map ;-P
I'm sorry I couldn't resist :)
I'm in 2 frames of mind, if they are guilty but are with-holding information then they should be "persuaded" to be more talkative, on the other hand things like torture should be used as a means of punishment.... I mean is something done by savages in he past.....
notsureyou 1 month ago
Hood was never build to attack Battleships her job was to attack heavy cruisers,destroyers or carriers, Hood had no change to beat bismarck, she could never get bismarck's shots,Bismarck was more armored,stronger guns,better built,Hood had no change to beat bismarck..
BlackDHbatman 2 months ago
the hood had been made with lighter armour then usual to make her faster but was her Achilles heel in the end .
Electricchris1 2 months ago
British is trying make excuse of losing that naval war against the Nazi Navy
KatiushaVN4 2 months ago
tthe titanic was 882 feet
rda125 3 months ago
7:20 Those coordinates are close to the Titanics 883 FEET 21 Knots and 46,000 tons
mrtrainboy019 3 months ago
to bad she was on the wrong side
jnevins1234 3 months ago
@jnevins1234
as Tea'c would say.... "Indeed"
notsureyou 3 months ago
i am curius what kind of 3d program they used for ships...maybe someone could make playble ships for silent hunter 4 too:)
TheBByamashiro 3 months ago
Clearly, we can only speculate. Allow me.
I believe fascism would still have the conditions without the Versailles Treaty to grow in Germany.
though the question is, would there be Globalism without the undermining of U.S. Sovereignty and distain for ( U.S. ) our posterity by paying off to have treaties since WWII
republic327 3 months ago
@republic327
me personally I'm not so sure. Germany was forced to take the whole blame for the war, and was punished accordingly. They had the second largest fleet at the start, at the end they were allowed to have a couple of pre-dreadnoughts. They went from a first rate nation to a second class nation. they lost territories etc To me that was the major contributer to the second world war.
add a couple of political power vacuums and the global depression........
notsureyou 3 months ago
@hala9660
though the question is, would there have been a world war 2 if Germany had not had to sign the versailles treaty?
notsureyou 4 months ago
@notsureyou
That is the question,.
StartbahnWest 1 month ago
If you like this watch "The death of the japanese navy". You'll love it and they "DO" mention the US navy. The Yamato's weight alone is more than the weight of the US's fleet of destroyer they fight. Propaganda this. Thanks for the show.
Thestealthfighterguy 4 months ago
In every other video, people cry that this series is 'American Propaganda' or that it 'Glorifies Americans'
Now that this episode doesn't even mention the U.S, Where are those fuckwads now?
ErikaCn100 4 months ago 2
Nice excuse by an Englishman. Shame. Loss is loss
KatiushaVN4 4 months ago
I LOVE THIS EPISODE OF DOGFIGHTS!!!!!!!!!!!!1
MultiBigace 5 months ago
Thats shoot out from under my ass.....Not out my ass
GLDHUNTRS 5 months ago
the USS Missouri is the most indestructible battleship durring WW2
indestrucible125 5 months ago
@indestrucible125
And how many surface actions against enemy surface units did she participate in?
How many times was she bombed/torpedoed?
Its all good and well to have a battleship that on paper is impressive. Its a totally different one to prove it in real life. Theoretical can at times be completely different to real life results.
notsureyou 5 months ago
@notsureyou Exactly why battleships were replaced by carriers
trivipesnipe 5 months ago
@trivipesnipe
very true, once the plane came of sufficient age, the game changed. The plane can carry its payload of hurt further inland, provide better protection and support. Aircraft time and time again proved how even though they are little they can do alot of damage. Against Bismarck, against POW, the italian fleet, Pearl Habor, Yamato. Just to name a few. Though me personally I'd build a model of a Battleship before a Carrier :)
notsureyou 5 months ago
@trivipesnipe
And they were also cheaper, less amour, relying upon its own fighters for the primary protection instead of inches and inches of steal which will eventually be penetrated by bigger and bigger bombs (Tallboy against Tirpiz).
notsureyou 5 months ago
i will not have my ship shoot out of my ass!!!!
indestrucible125 5 months ago
the bismarck is not the biggest nor is it the most powerful the biggest and most powerful ship was the yamato
Robloxman123100 6 months ago
@Robloxman123100 Might as well have been a rowing boat with the timing.
seangrie8 5 months ago
@seangrie8 lol?
Robloxman123100 5 months ago
Does anyone know what the song is at 6:41?been trying to find it for ages...
MrDeano324 6 months ago
Yamato?#
TheSIFilms 6 months ago
rofl "I will not have my ship shot out from under my butt." rofl
ww2planeliker562001 7 months ago
@10mism Thanks for the antiquified Third-Reich German impersonation, I know you are sitting somewhere in a small rm in Slough.
Mind, "Hairs of Queen's Pussy" and "You dishonest country ppl" are expressions I will try to use in the coming weeks.
Now all Germany's bases are belong to... Greece.
Heritagius 7 months ago
YOU FUCKING BRITISHERS, GERMANY WILL GET ANOTHER GREAT LEADER LIKE HITLER & WILL BUILT MORE POWERFUL SHIP LIKE BISMARK, THEN WE WILL GET YOU AGAIN YOU ASS HOLES, YOU CONTROL MEDIA OF ALL WORLD & TELL NEGATIVE NEWS..& SPREAD HATE, NUDITY & VIOLENCE....YOU HAIRS OF QUEENS PUSSY...FUCK YOU LL ENGLISH MEN & WOMEN,,,,I HATE YOU MOTHERS FUCKER..HEL HITLER & GERMANY, WE DON'T START WORLD WAR YOU UK * USA START IT, FDR REPORT SAYS THAT US ATTACK ITS OWN SOIL PERAL HARBOUR, U DISHONEST COUNTRY PEOPLE,,
10mism 7 months ago
@10mism Oh dear don't cry,maybe your right and the third try will be the charm but i wouldn't bet on it .
iroscoe 7 months ago
@iroscoe thats a joke, lol Germany a super power they have no idea what weapons the United States poccess, plus you Brits are the grandchildren of the men that held them back alone, I would say you have the same genectic predisposition we do, to stop evil doers. That dude must be insane, lol, what a rant.
debzeppeliniv 7 months ago
@10mism
Well you have started 2 world wars. We have started...erm....none. You invaded Poland in ww2, and asassinated the french president in ww1. I would say that is pretty good evidence of you german fuck tards starting the wars. ww2 was being fought 3 years before pearl harbour you stupid nazi ass wipe.
MrDeano324 6 months ago 3
@MrDeano324
lol both Germany AND Russia invaded Poland, Germany assisinating the French president in WW1... i'd have to say I've never heard that one before.
I'm def not a nazi or even remotely support nazism, but the truth is alot of countries have either started wars, or colonised the world through force.
notsureyou 6 months ago
2:56 left, is that a goalkeeper?
winky4u 7 months ago
was the bismarck the biggest battleship in ww2 or was it the yamoto
101poorly 7 months ago
Comment removed
10mism 7 months ago
Comment removed
10mism 7 months ago
@101poorly
It was Yamato. Although the Bismark was in service 3 years before Yamato was commissioned. Also the Yamato engaged allied vessels only once before her kamikazi mission. The japs frequently pulled yamato off the frontline during a confrontaition through fear of losing her. Therefore Yamato was larger, but Bismark saw more action. Another point..the British built equal size guns to Yamato on HMS Furious twenty years before ww2. Although the British saw the massive guns as unnecessary.
MrDeano324 6 months ago 5
My dad served on Hood until his transfer to HMS Kylemore, just a month before Hood's sinking. He lost many good friends. Six months later, Kylemore met her fate too, at the hands of German Dorniers, & my dad was one of only 8 survivors. He was awarded the DSM for courageous conduct during & after the sinking. The medal was pinned on his chest by Lord Mountbatten.
speakswahilidammit 7 months ago
Another joke was the "legal limits" for battleship sizes. LOLOL Legal limits? That's like have a speed limit for race cars. The Biz was over 50,000 tons. What were the Brits going to do? Pull them over with a fleet of ships and give them a ticket? LOLOL Rules of War. #1...there are no rules.
tyme4mike 7 months ago 22
@tyme4mike
It was the treaty of versailles signed after world war one stating that germay were alowed only limited millitay capability and only to be used in defense of germany and not for agressive motives. This was punishment to germany for plunging the world into all out war that cost millions of lives. Hitler had to keep his millitary strength under wraps untill the right moment as Britain and France could have easily stoped him in his tracks if they found out while germany was still weak.
MrDeano324 6 months ago 3
@tyme4mike That´s Not was Sweden Said XD
jasincl 6 months ago
@tyme4mike The Washington Treaty came about after WWI because the battleship and battlecruiser were the "nuclear" weapons of the day and like nuclear weapons today, were used as the primary weapons systems for deterrence. It makes sense as to why they did it.
Lionwolf0777 6 months ago
@tyme4mike when they started the building of bismarck,there was no war... therefor there was a limit on size of war ships...
ollo1982 3 months ago
@tyme4mike rule 2: follow the geneva convention
alcapone796 2 months ago
@alcapone796
pretty much every country broke the geneva convention. that however doesn't excuse it.
notsureyou 2 months ago
@tyme4mike these rules were written down after WW1. In the Versailles peace treaty, Germany accepted to build ships up to a small Size.
Heliodan326 2 months ago
@Heliodan326
Germany had no choice with the treaty of Versailles, under the anglo-german agreement 1935 from memory (which meant that germany had to follow the washington treaty but allowed them to build larger ships and a bigger anvy) by the time she was built the treaty had been voided by the japanese, so bismarck was legal.
notsureyou 2 months ago
I never understood why the Brits had their heads up their arses over the Hood. They knew her wooden deck was the biggest thorn-in-the-side of any Battleship on the sea, yet they sent her out like she was invincible when she should have been harbored to have a new deck installed. One shot took it to the bottom. It was simply a dumb move no matter how you look at it. Damn, they had the Rodney, the King George V, the Prince of Wales, the Repulse, etc..etc..the Hood was an unnecessary sacrifice.
tyme4mike 7 months ago
@tyme4mike Unfortunately, the Hood wasnt a battleship. she is a battlecruiser, built for speed and not hitting power. she was built for hit and run and not to stand toe-to-toe with the then biggest battleship ever built. but i agree, why didn't we just send our battleships after Bismark I will never know. I can only imagine they tried to beat hitting power with sheer speed.
RexalLB 7 months ago
@tyme4mike
what do you mean wooden deck? Hood did not have a wooden deck, and as I keep saying at the range Hood was fatally hit by Bismarck (if that was what caused the explosion) given the characteristics of Bismarcks guns, the shell would had to have penetrated VERTICLE amour to penetrate vital areas, NOT horizontal amour.
notsureyou 7 months ago
@notsureyou sorry, but the shell hit on the top of Hood's deck. Hood had enough armour on the sides to survive a hit. She would'nt be in good condition, but she would survive. Being a battle cruiser with the armor of a cruiser, and being from WWI where battles were fought at closer ranges, the armor, where she was hit, she was penetrated instantly.
WolfLordAlpha 7 months ago
@WolfLordAlpha
not true, at the range Hood was hit Bismarck could penetrate the side amour of EVERY ww2 (so modern) battleship. kbismarck which has a penetration table for Bismarcks guns, show that at 17km her guns could penetrate 460mm and that is modern amour ww2 standard not ww1 standard, Hood was hit at a tad over 15km. Whats interesting is that the table gives no figure for deck penetration below 22km.
notsureyou 7 months ago
@tyme4mike
It was because of her legend. She was the fastest, most powerful battleship in the word during ww1. She notched up victory after victory, and in doing so, became a British icon of sea power. Much the same as if Britain recalled the Spitfire back to active service today. The Spitfire would not stand much of a chance against a modern jet. But the sight of it flying over Britain would inspire courage and fearlessnes into the British people and millitary personel. Thats what Hood was for
MrDeano324 6 months ago 3
@MrDeano324
I think you mean in the inter-war period, since HMS HOOD was not completed until 1920. But She was loved by the British people, and was seen as the embodiment of naval power (like a aircraft carrier is today). She never fought in ww1 (since she was completed 2 years after ww1 finished), and never (to my knowledge) fought a proper naval battle until her battle with the Bismarck.
notsureyou 6 months ago
@notsureyou
I stand corrected my friend. She fought in the Italian Abyssinian War, and the Spanish civil war. I was thinking of those wars leading up to ww1 insted of ww2. My mistake. But my initial point is still valid. She was there to serve as an inspiration to the fleet and the British population back home.
MrDeano324 6 months ago
@tyme4mike We must first take into consideration if those battleships were even available to intercept Bismarck. But I'm pretty sure they had a few battleships that were free. I do agree that sending out Hood was a foolish decision, but I do hate it that the Brits got hot-headed that a german battleship sank their flagship. It was their choice to send out a warship to battle with another one which had clearly out-classed it, and so they'd payed the price.
Their fault and their loss.
speedenforcer918 4 weeks ago
Didn't the Bismarck at one time or another to clip the wings of the bi-planes shoot at the water to create massive columns of water?
BandwidthDestroyer 7 months ago
nam if i was flying in a plane with anti-aircraft guns shooting at me, only three words come to mind: Balls Of Steel
Drspeedstackingguy 7 months ago
Wonder how many Panzer III and IV you could made for the cost of the Bismarck, and the numbers of tanks.
PANZERDRIVER1 8 months ago
which bigger?yamato?or bismarck?
sirrah060389 8 months ago
@sirrah060389 Yamato by a large margin.
warwatcher91 8 months ago
@sirrah060389 And P.S. They were refering to the largest battleship in the Atlantic. The Yomato is the largest in the Pacific.
WIZKID8675 7 months ago
@WIZKID8675 actually I think at the time yamato wasn't even built yet.It was completed in 1942 I believe
TheWoodstock2009 7 months ago
@TheWoodstock2009 Part of it too was the Yamato was closely guarded during its construction to keep its full specifications a secret. Somewhat of an irony considering how much of a non-factor it ultimately played in the war.
trojanhorsealpha 7 months ago
@trojanhorsealpha yeah what an irony
TheWoodstock2009 7 months ago
@WIZKID8675
No they were not. In early 1941. Yamato was not commissioned. Therefore Bismarck was the largest battleship in the world. Not by length however, as HMS Hood was actually 2 meters longer. She was the largest by width, tonnage, and firepower. Yamato was not commissioned until December 1941...
MrDeano324 6 months ago 8
@MrDeano324 I know about that, but I was refering to the history of battleships in the pacific and Atlantic theaters in WW2.
WIZKID8675 6 months ago
@MrDeano324 In military terms the length of a warship isn't a factor in determining the largest warship. I'm a navy vet and it's interesting how the civilian world puts so much emphasis on the length of a ship when its displacement is what determines what ship is largest.
Bizmark was definitely one of the most advanced capital ships in the world. The Hood was unfortunately outclassed in that surface action.
Lionwolf0777 6 months ago
@MrDeano324 even so they should say "was the most powerful warship" not "the most powerful warship"
ALPHATHEAWESOME 5 months ago
@ALPHATHEAWESOME
Not really. This documentary is detailing events that occured in early to mid 1941. The sinking of Hood at the Denmark straight. And the subsequent sinking of Bismark by British ww1 era bi-planes. All of which occured before the world even had an inkling of Yamato. Therefore saying, "the most powerful warship", is indeed correct.
MrDeano324 5 months ago
@MrDeano324
um Bismarck wasn't sunk by the swordfish :)
notsureyou 4 months ago
@MrDeano324 The North Carolinas had the Bismarck beaten in both armour and throw weight of salvos. USS North Carolina was launched in 1940 and commissioned April 1941.
vnlk65n 4 months ago
@vnlk65n
but USS North Carolina was not effective until early 1942 due to propeller vibrations issues.
The first radar fitted to her had slightly less range then the one on bismarck
In terms of throw weight over a 5 min yes NC wins, but number of shells fired B wins
As originally built B has far better AA then NC
B has slight speed advantage over NC
B designed to fight French and British BB's
NC designed to fight the Japanese (hence the super heavy shell)
notsureyou 4 months ago
@notsureyou I would need to see specifics regarding the radar range. In any case, it was effective enough to critically damage, in very short order, the Kirishima in the middle of the night.
I digress though, my point is that until the launch of the Yamato and Iowa, there was no single ship that was clearly ahead of the others. Bismarck had relatively thin armour for her size and was evidently vulnerable to the 16" guns of Rodney.
vnlk65n 4 months ago
@vnlk65n 13" of armor is hardly relatively thin.
don417 4 months ago
@don417 Compared to the 16 inches of Rodney and North Carolina, yes.
vnlk65n 4 months ago
@vnlk65n Rodney only had a
14.12 inch (358.6 mm) belt. It did have 16" on the turret face.
don417 4 months ago
@vnlk65n
the radar originally fitted to NC could detect a large ship at 23km, B radar had an effective range of 25km and had a tolerance of +/- 50m, but NO PPI. The engagement you mentioned happened in late 1942 and occured at 5.3km.
Belt thickness on B was thicker than on NC but only 50% of it was sloped and didnt extend to the keel. NC had a fully sloped belt which extended to the keel (though getting thinner the deeper it went).
notsureyou 4 months ago
@vnlk65n
When Rodney opened fire the range was between 20-23km, Bismarck was hit nearly 20min later which according to the plot map on the site kbismarck gives a range of circa 14km. At that range EVERY battleship is going to have issues with Rodney's 16inch shells. After Bismarcks guns were silenced Rodney closed to between 2.5km and 4km and continue to hammer away at Bismarck.
notsureyou 4 months ago
@notsureyou
NC v's B would def be an epic fight, the 2700 pound shells would give NC an big advantage, given the push for the americans to rely on radar for radar controlled gunnery a night engagment would be the most ideal situation for NC.
During day time would be fairly even, the germans mainly relied on optical range finders and bracket firing which def worked.
Lady luck also cannot be forgoten and could play a part either way with either ship scoring a critical hit early on.
notsureyou 4 months ago
@MrDeano324 well the hood did not have a good day did it?
Mr12roundstofred 1 month ago
Yamato was made to destroy any battleship at a stand off range and why would it have ARmor resist only for 14 inch Guns if she was fighting battleships like North Carolina??? she prob had armor that could resist more than 14 and prob more than 18 inch from a long shot..!!!
BlackDHbatman 8 months ago
@BlackDHbatman what most dont know about yamato, is that her armor was 16in thick, but wasnt as strong as german KC or british CA armor of the time. she also suffered from a very weak joint between the main armor belt and the lower belt. post war testing showed that German KC armor was only slightly less resiliant than british CA armor, and superior to US Class A armor plating. the point im trying to make is Yamato's armor was heavy to make up for the armor issues.
akulaknight 8 months ago
Comment removed
BlackDHbatman 8 months ago
Wish they would do an episode on the sunderland vs 8 ju88c
themightyPhantom 9 months ago
It isnt true the way they say that the Bismarck was the largest battleship in the world. The Hood was 33 ft. Longer (Hood was 860 ft. long, Bismarck was only 823 ft. long)
MisterCyber1 9 months ago
@MisterCyber1 823 + 33 = 860?
jallan1407 9 months ago
@jallan1407
lol he's prob using the smidgeon slide rule ;)
notsureyou 9 months ago
@jallan1407 823+33=856. not 860 but you were close :P.
BlackDHbatman 8 months ago
@BlackDHbatman please note the question mark i put in after '860' i was questioning his math in the first place lol
jallan1407 8 months ago
@MisterCyber1
Hood is not a BATTLESHIP, she was a BATTLECRUISER, though extra amour was added during construction. the truth though is that Hood is an in-between ship, designed to be the ultimate Battlecruiser (bigger, more powerful, and faster than previous BC's) she should not have gone up against anything bigger than a heavy cruiser. but since she appeared to be big and powerful she was used where she shouldnt have, and her luck unfortunently ran out (RIP all aboard).
notsureyou 9 months ago
@MisterCyber1 they are refering to her sheer weight. only one battleship weighed more, Yamato, and she isnt finished yet, nor are the iowas. thats why they called her the largest warship aflot. she also had the highest armor to weight ratio of any battleship. keep in mind too, she was fast. 31 knots, the iowas only managed 33-34knots. also, she was a stepping stone ship. the H39 class was the next one in line.
akulaknight 8 months ago
She did have a high armor to weight ratio yes. However the armor layout was obsolete. Multiple armored decks, a single torpedo bulkhead, and heavily armored forward conning tower. I understand Bismarck could go faster that the design speed of 30 knots. I don't know about 31 knots. The Iowas could theoretically reach 34 knots, but I have never seen a written report stating that had been done.
thatkidinthegreenhat 8 months ago
@thatkidinthegreenhat
the main issues with Bismarcks amour layout is more the fact that the designers tried to stick amour on pretty much everything. Instead of having the all or nothing principle and the 4 turret design. the 4 turret design means a greater portion of the hull is protected, but that extra weight could have been used to improve deck amour.
the single torpedo bulkhead work against torpedos, and it did manage to prevent the 14inch shell from POW from entering the citadel.
notsureyou 8 months ago
Should have had air support...poor Marck :{
turban45 9 months ago
I have to say bismarck is kind of outdated because its old weaponry. Yamato and the iowa class could beat it well. Even the South Dakota class could beat it. But the germans kind of cheated using a super weapon. Or maybe he just hit the magazine. I don't get that part.
pilotso 9 months ago
@pilotso So is you mom ..how can bismarck be outdated if its the oldest of the 3
cliffthelightning 9 months ago
@pilotso
what do you mean 'old weaponary'?
with the radar that the US had in 1940 and early 1941 it wouldnt be as easy as you believe. IOWA (if finished in may 1941) maybe, her speed advantage would allow her to control the battle, Yamato yes due to sheer amount of amour, NC or SD, well NC was only designed to resist 14inch shells (what her main armament was originally intended to be) so I wouldnt put bet the farm, id say SD has more of a chance than NC. Once better radar, well......
notsureyou 9 months ago
"most powerful warship on the planet". WRONG IT was the Yamato.
daboom2006 9 months ago
@daboom2006 Bismark was launched before Yamato. Yamato was only 2 weeks old when Bismark was comissioned.
Wyrmshadow 9 months ago
@daboom2006 often wondered aout that. I guess the world consisted of the atlantic.
123456789mischief 9 months ago
5:50 Press that over and over again :D
SplatterMack123 10 months ago
Hood was a capital ship, But it wasn't the "pride of the navy" It was pretty damn old at the time of this battle.
Dissapointment4 10 months ago
@Dissapointment4
google confirms that the Hood was the pride of the royal navy :)
she was old but loved by all....... except the Axis ;)
notsureyou 10 months ago
@pointy2, i am well aware of the uboat issues. ive dedicated years of my life into learning as much as possible about them. they could dive deeper than their counterparts, and their torpeados were far more reliable and even had acustic warheads on them. the type XXI was going to change the game, and would have, but mr hitler drug his feet like he did on the ME 262. ever heard of Albrecht? read up on that and every other bit of info you can find on the uboats before slandering them.
akulaknight 10 months ago
Cheap junk? The Spitfire, the P51 the B17 the Iowa class battleships, the Battle class destroyers, the KGV class battleships? The first computers that helped crack Japanese and german ciphers, Radar that could be carried on aircraft by 1942 and accurate enought for accurate blind firing which the Germans never did? Do you know what the chances were for a german sub surviving its first patrol by 1944? No idea what books your reading but they are wrong!
pointy2 10 months ago
The story of the war is that the Germans were outgunned in technology. The war was a constant leap-frogging of technological innovation - and the allies won that battle! The irony of this battle was that the Bismarck was sunk by out-of-date airplanes.
kevinastraw 10 months ago
@kevinastraw
mainly because in 1940 Hitler stopped all projects that couldnt be completed in 6 months.......... because he believed that the war would be over by then....................... The germans were not so much outgunned in technology as they were outnumbered, and with morons in leadership the end result is going to be failure, but as i heard in one documentary "Stupid people start wars, and stupid people run wars, and rarely listen to those fighting the war"
notsureyou 10 months ago
@kevinastraw
The Germans were not really outgunned in technology, they shot themselves in the foot majorly when Hitler stopped the development and research of technology (like radar) that couldnt be completed in 6 months, in 1940 because he believed the war would be won by the end of the year.
They were out numbered, they didnt have effective allies, they had deluded people at the top who had no idea what they were really doing (like Goering), what other result could there be?
notsureyou 10 months ago
@kevinastraw question for you sir. would you mind pointing me to the evidence she was sunk by airplanes? she clearly was not. they did cripple her steering gear with a lucky shot. i would disagree with you that the allies won the technology war. we were and still are years behind the germans. we won because we could produce alot of cheep junk and overwhelm the germans. their tanks, ships, subs, machine guns were and still are way ahead of ours. hell, our abrams uses a german main gun.
akulaknight 10 months ago
@akulaknight Luck?,theres no such thing,luck doesn't build aircraft carriers(a weapons system the Germans never produced)nor does it train aircrew that can get airborne in the conditions the Ark Royal was experiencing and then deliver torpedoes on target .
iroscoe 10 months ago
@iroscoe really? perhaps you have never heard of the graf zepplin. true she wasnt commisioned, but she possesed major leaps in carrier tech that we didnt have untill after the war. the saddest part is she never had aircraft built for her, and thats why hitler abandoned construction on her. @ pointy2, the KGV had issues with their complex turrets, and the germans had aircraft radar. ever heard of the condor? the gato class would have been ripped apart too in the same situation.
akulaknight 10 months ago
@akulaknight Ive heard of it but discounted it as it never saw service past being a lumber store then target practice for the Soviets,as for it possesing major leaps in carrier tech what were they casemated guns?....
iroscoe 10 months ago
@iroscoe she had 2 Voith-Schneider cycloidal propeller-rudders used for helping the ship dock, and low speed maneuvering. she had 2 catapults allowing her to launch 18 aircraft in 30 second intervals. she also possesed 4 arresting cables, and 2 more emergency cables closer to the bow. most of these would later appear on carriers in the jet age. its a shame hitler was to arrogant to see what he had sitting in front of him.
akulaknight 10 months ago
@akulaknight Cycloidal propellers are alright if you lack tugs i suppose,18 aircraft at 30 second intervals sounds great in theory but we will never know what they would of acheived in practice...besides using catapults and arrestor gear is hardly proof of German innovation as both the British and Americans did far more to develop those technologies .
iroscoe 10 months ago
@akulaknight
but the problem with her catapults, is that they used compressed air, not steam........... which took a long time to recharge when the feeder tank was empty.
And it was more so goering who put up resistance to the carrier.
notsureyou 10 months ago
@iroscoe I WAS THERE YO ARE WRONG
biggrigga 10 months ago
@biggrigga ah well if you put it in capitals it must be right,if only the caps lock would work on my computer....
iroscoe 10 months ago
@iroscoe hehehe
biggrigga 10 months ago
@biggrigga that was you? hell I thought i recognized the name. that was some scary shit wasn't it?
123456789mischief 9 months ago
@123456789mischief Indeed it was. I thought I would have had my last cigarette that day. Part of me wishes I went down with her...I was lucky to be picked up as only few of the thousands of sailors were--As if it was some sort of sick lottery.
biggrigga 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@biggrigga
funny 2 months ago you said you served on graf Spee so which is it? the below is what you wrote 2 months ago. "watch who you are speaking to , i served on board the Graf Spee and every member on board was recued by the Royal Navy and we all knew we would do the same . the British Navy and Kriegsmarine repected each other . i dont appreciated smart-mouthed kids like you acting as if you know everything about the war . swinehunde"
notsureyou 9 months ago
german engineering is very admirable...i do not support hitler. but d germans fought very bravely in ww2
IowaEngineering 10 months ago
the Germans just had awesome power in all places of battle, sea air and land. in no way i support Hitler but its very fascinating how Germany fought.
BetoG34 10 months ago
a giant can never beat swarms of raging ants in the long term........
cobracurse 11 months ago
my bad with NATO, i was quoting from memory, the NATO issue had to do with re-unification where alot of countries were a little more at ease with germany being one again, if they continued to be part of NATO
So why do you see Germany as a threat?
Germany is in a joint military development alliance with several of its neighbours, they have exported tanks to many of its neighbours.
notsureyou 11 months ago
germany is no longer a threat because the youth do not care. the french and german youth do not hate each other. they have no 'unresolved issues' with each other. for them that was the past, today is the future.
notsureyou 11 months ago
here are some numbers for you guys. the german 38cm (15 in) guns used on bismarck were better at penetrating armor than the IJN 18.1 in guns. according to armor penetration charts, at 20,000 yds bismarck could punch through 16.9 inches of armor, yamato at the same range could only muster 13.8. and the british 14's used on king george at 20,000 yds was 15.2 in. bismarcks muzzle velocity was 2,690 ft/sec , yamato 2,300 ft/sec, and the king george 2,300 ft/sec. bismarck wins in muzzle energy
akulaknight 11 months ago
@akulaknight
sorry to disagree with you, but at 20,000 yards yamato penetrates 19.8inches not 13.8inches. And since the bismarck used a higher muzzle velocity and a lighter shell, her deck amour penetration wasnt anywhere near as good as other guns except the italian 15inch gun, which had even higher muzzle velocity to bismarck.
though bismarcks guns did have the highest ROF
notsureyou 11 months ago
the bismarck was a top line battleship. but 1 ship can't do the job of many never should have been sent out the way it was with no support.the Kriegsmarne was not like it was in 1916.
hitzer2000 11 months ago
@hitzer2000
it should have def been alot better planned, its a shame she was a beautiful ship..........
notsureyou 11 months ago
Japanese battleship Yamato is more beauiful and powerful than bismarck. But i pitied those two warships, if only there is one superpower who can make again those powerful warship with a lot of modifications and modernize armaments, like rail guns instead of ballistics, Gatling gun instead of machine gun, lasers and missiles. I think it would match an aircraft carrier with ease. And NAME them as USS BISMARCK AND USS YAMATO.
razorsharpview9090 11 months ago
@razorsharpview9090 the reason they say bismarck is the most powerful warship afloat is that in may of 1941, bismarck was. yamato would not become a commisioned ship untill december of 1941. so at the time of bismarcks maiden voyage, she was the most powerful battleship opperational at the time. bismarck is the only battleship to have 40% of her displament be armor weight. yamato only had 33% of her weight was armor. i agree that both are beautiful ships.
akulaknight 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Bare36 "Bismarck is not underguned by eny battleship in history.it had the best cannons ever put on a ship,even today..germans put just 8 guns on her with a good reason,it was firing more projectiles every minute"??????? don't you know the 16"/50 caliber Mark 7 gun of the USS Iowa? 9 of these firing AP Mark 8: 2,700 lb. (1,225 kg) Shell.. do you think bismark is not underguned?
chubsy02 1 year ago
imagine if the bismarck managed to get to the atlantic unseen, brittain would probably lose the war
billboardx25 1 year ago
@billboardx25 naaa her fate would be like Tirpitz
bobohomania 1 year ago
@bobohomania
how? Tirpiz was bombed by tallboy equipped lancasters................ Perhaps a better example would be graf spee
notsureyou 11 months ago
@billboardx25 I really don't see how a single battleship would of been able to win the war on its own .
iroscoe 1 year ago
@iroscoe And that in a nutshell sums up the whole downfall of the massive ship idea, yes the Bismarck sunk the British flagship the Hood however it was critically damaged in that battle by the Hood's smaller escort the Prince of Wales, that damage set in motion the chain of events that would bring about the Bismarck's destruction, ships don't win sea battles navy's do.
llynellyn 11 months ago
@llynellyn Indeed,one suspects that building a flotilla of long legged light cruisers with the resources squandered on Bismarck and Tirpitz would of served the Kriegsmarine surface fleet much better .
iroscoe 11 months ago
@billboardx25
Only an idiot could believe that one ship could win a war. That's why most seafaring nations build fleets.
shadowmancer122 11 months ago
@shadowmancer122
Didnt say win the war, but it could make it alot easier for Germany
billboardx25 11 months ago
@billboardx25
The Bismarck made nothing easier for Germany. It was sunk on its first sortie.
shadowmancer122 11 months ago
@shadowmancer122 i said it would, if the bismarck got trhough, with u boats protecting it
billboardx25 11 months ago
@billboardx25
U-boats would be incapable in protecting the Bismarck. On the surface, their deck guns would be ineffective and submerged they couldn't pace with the suface ships.
shadowmancer122 11 months ago
@shadowmancer122
Uboats were made for sinking surface ships, a torpedo can do a lot of damage to all floating vessels.
billboardx25 11 months ago
@billboardx25
Not when it can't keep pace with surface ships and their ever changing direction as they take evasive maneuvers. For a torpedo to strike its target, the sub crew must calculate lead, speed, etc. and hope that the target doesn't change course. I think your confusing modern submarine warfare with the capabilities of the WW II German u-boat. As escort vessals, WW II era submarines are useless. That's why navies build destroyers, frigates and corvettes. Your knowledge is lacking.
shadowmancer122 11 months ago
@shadowmancer122
u boats have the element of suprise my frend
billboardx25 11 months ago
@billboardx25
Yes they do but again, when thet target ships are faster that a submerged sub and they keep changing directions to avoid enemy shell fire, you're never going to get a firing solution. During WW II, when subs do sink capital ships, the ships are not taking radical evasive maneuvers and the sub crew have time to get into position for a proper firing solution. The sinking of the Japanese battleship, Kongo, is a good example of this.
shadowmancer122 10 months ago
@shadowmancer122
in WW2 homing torpedo's were invented
though the germans at the end of the war did have a sub that was capable of doing 17knots submerged, the current destroyers (for that time period) could do over 30 knots.
notsureyou 11 months ago
@notsureyou
Yes. In fact I think the Germans were the first to invent them. They had acoustic and magnetic homing torpedos but they weren't the precise weapons as those that exist today. You still had to calculate speed, lead, etc. The German type XXI u-boat was developed to late to be of any use in the war but it became the basis for the USS Nautilus. By the way, the fastest subs of WW II were the Japanese Sentaka class (I-201class) which could do 35 knots submerged.
shadowmancer122 10 months ago
@shadowmancer122
I had vaguley heard about the I-201, though apparently from what ive just read their max speed was only 19knots (the original planned was 35knots), but that is still faster than the XXI only by just under 2 knots, but faster is faster :)
though the german could dive deeper (they list crush depth as 280m, though in the game silent hunter 2 its a little over 300 :) )
notsureyou 10 months ago
though the germans were experimenting with coastal subs that did achive 25knots (type XVII)
notsureyou 10 months ago
i bet the the Israelis are feeling very much like the brits did back then lol
alinkyng 1 year ago
bismarck is chuck norris' fishing boat
alinkyng 1 year ago
The Hood was a battlecruiser not a battleship!
canadaloveswhiskey 1 year ago
i'd imagine ships would be advanced enough not to have to fire broadside. design ships to fire forward and backward as well. it would screw the T formation tactic.
108Dax 1 year ago
this was the first i see, in the begin of the serie in the year of 2007
darthzenos 1 year ago
hey it died trying to dowhat the super yamato class battle ship tryed todo 2. and her fate was the same=/
HK655 1 year ago
it's not the most powerful and largest ship afloat.. It's the YAMATO class battleship.. BISMARK is also under-gun by US battleships North Carolina, South Dakota, and Iowa Classes..
chubsy02 1 year ago