british should have used air craft careers to attack bismark in the first place, look how effective aircrafts are against battleships in major naval battles of pacific, most notably pearl harbor and battle of leyte gulf
@AirlineFilms I should not compare Atlantic to pacific theater of war. But still believe atlantic could have been better fought. U-boats were no modern day submarines that can stay under water indefinitely....
but i like british strategy to fight u-boats after 1941, using escort groups to fight u-boat near convoys only.
@rahulbond3m True, they changed their tactics in 1941 due to heavy losses and it was a must tho, but I think the Pacific battles were much nicer in my opinion. More straight battles between the Japanese and the American/British/Dutch fleet. I think Germany was quite good doing a u-boat tactic... Brought down many ships compared their own loses.
@AirlineFilms agreed...pacific battles were mostly fleet vs fleet and atlantic battles were kind of convoy vs wolfpacks. And german u-boat commanders were no jokes. Germans actually sent a few U-boats to help bismarck fight but they were too late. else a few torpedos on king george and bye bye british flag-ship. That kinda gives me an idea....british should also have used torpedos to sink bismarck instead of so many cannon shots
@rahulbond3m True, I think it was impossible for the Allies to win a combat against the Bismarck or Yamato by fleet to fleet, even the accuracy of German soldiers were simply better, but Bismarck was shot down mostly by airplanes
I've heard that there is room to doubt the Bismarck sank the Hood and that it might have been the Prinz Eugen...she had the range first, made hits first and her high angle 8" guns were firing at extreme range which means they had a very steep trajectory, much like mortar fire, very plunging.
The Hood was susceptible to plunging fire and this is what killed her...Bismarck's range was such that her fire was on a more ballistic lob and not as plunging.
Hood was battlecruiser-turned-battleship, and PoW had turrets malfunctioning. Had it been King George V vs Bismarck, I think it would be close one, most probably stalemate. By the way, Bismarck was not sunk - it was crippled by British artillery, and scuttled by its own crew when it could not fight anymore due to its turrets being destroyed.
the Hood was a battle ship and the bismarck finished the battle quikly as she did for many other battle ships. the Bismarck was teh nightmare for all the enemies.
In other words; it doesn't matter if "Bismarck was damaged" was damaged ... it was sunk, Just like the Hood. I don't envy anyone who had to endure WW II or any war for that matter. Rule 1 (a): Was is hell. Can you believe only 3 of the 1,418 man Hood crew survived? Tragic.
All hail the bismarck! :D
haedbanger64 2 months ago
british should have used air craft careers to attack bismark in the first place, look how effective aircrafts are against battleships in major naval battles of pacific, most notably pearl harbor and battle of leyte gulf
rahulbond3m 2 months ago
@rahulbond3m true, but kinda risky with a sea full of u-boats
AirlineFilms 1 week ago
@AirlineFilms i knw its risky...but far better than battleships or battle cruisers.
careers are fast, never operate alone (always hav cruiser and destroyer escorts) and also plenty of scout fighter and bomber aircraft.
rahulbond3m 1 week ago
@rahulbond3m UK navy strategics weren't quite great during the begin of war. Who's idea was it to hunt u-boats with aircrafts careers?
AirlineFilms 1 week ago
@AirlineFilms I should not compare Atlantic to pacific theater of war. But still believe atlantic could have been better fought. U-boats were no modern day submarines that can stay under water indefinitely....
but i like british strategy to fight u-boats after 1941, using escort groups to fight u-boat near convoys only.
rahulbond3m 1 week ago
@rahulbond3m True, they changed their tactics in 1941 due to heavy losses and it was a must tho, but I think the Pacific battles were much nicer in my opinion. More straight battles between the Japanese and the American/British/Dutch fleet. I think Germany was quite good doing a u-boat tactic... Brought down many ships compared their own loses.
AirlineFilms 1 week ago
@AirlineFilms agreed...pacific battles were mostly fleet vs fleet and atlantic battles were kind of convoy vs wolfpacks. And german u-boat commanders were no jokes. Germans actually sent a few U-boats to help bismarck fight but they were too late. else a few torpedos on king george and bye bye british flag-ship. That kinda gives me an idea....british should also have used torpedos to sink bismarck instead of so many cannon shots
rahulbond3m 1 week ago
@rahulbond3m True, I think it was impossible for the Allies to win a combat against the Bismarck or Yamato by fleet to fleet, even the accuracy of German soldiers were simply better, but Bismarck was shot down mostly by airplanes
AirlineFilms 1 week ago
I've heard that there is room to doubt the Bismarck sank the Hood and that it might have been the Prinz Eugen...she had the range first, made hits first and her high angle 8" guns were firing at extreme range which means they had a very steep trajectory, much like mortar fire, very plunging.
The Hood was susceptible to plunging fire and this is what killed her...Bismarck's range was such that her fire was on a more ballistic lob and not as plunging.
It can never be proven...food for thought.
seanboud 1 year ago
@seanboud Can not be proven? The Bismarck did sink the Hood told by eye-witnesses
AirlineFilms 1 week ago
Hood was battlecruiser-turned-battleship, and PoW had turrets malfunctioning. Had it been King George V vs Bismarck, I think it would be close one, most probably stalemate. By the way, Bismarck was not sunk - it was crippled by British artillery, and scuttled by its own crew when it could not fight anymore due to its turrets being destroyed.
Picard578 2 years ago
the Hood was a battle ship and the bismarck finished the battle quikly as she did for many other battle ships. the Bismarck was teh nightmare for all the enemies.
stalenco 2 years ago
The Hood wasn't a battleship, it was a battlecruiser. Thats why it didn't have the armour necessary to protect itself from Bismark
moomoo1337 2 years ago
I have a model of the hood
great battleship
Riku1135 2 years ago 2
Dont forget bismarck was damaged and her orders were not to fight warships!
johndeq 2 years ago 4
Don't forget the first / last rule of WAR:
Kill or be killed.
In other words; it doesn't matter if "Bismarck was damaged" was damaged ... it was sunk, Just like the Hood. I don't envy anyone who had to endure WW II or any war for that matter. Rule 1 (a): Was is hell. Can you believe only 3 of the 1,418 man Hood crew survived? Tragic.
sidDkid87 2 years ago 4
You are very right but when you look at Hood now its clear no one had any chance of getting out!
johndeq 2 years ago
bismark held their fire british shot first
then bismark also decides not to pursue
wonder why
i guess the hood was asking for it
emforty2 3 years ago 3
hood wasnt asking for it.
it was her orders to sink the bismarck
bighairybiker45 2 years ago
@thekrazeone the admiral hesitated remedering his orders not to engauge warships reason not to purse was bismark was hurt several hits by PoW guns
thekrazeone 1 year ago