I realize that the use of radar, even at this stage in WW2, would negate the effectiveness of such a smoke screen in attempting to obscure themselves/evade. I'm sure both sides didn't know exactly how advanced either side's radar technology was, so no harm in trying the old trick.
The HMS Prince of Wales "makes smoke" was simply an attempt to evade/reduce the chance taking hits, or was it a some kind of signal she's disengaging and unable to fight? "makes smoke" could easily mean the engines were pushed to max output to attempt to out-speed the enemy, and not purposefulness making smoke.
I know smoke screens were used by various ships for various reason (though it rarely show in documentaries), just wondering what "makes smoke" meant in this case.
In this Battle she "retired"/fled from the battle. returned to port and was repaired.
She was later sunk with Repulse in the pacific by the japanese. As "luck" would have it a single torp hit her aft where one of her shafts entered the hull rendering her immobile and in a sinking condition. She as well as Repulse were sunk.
@jnevins1234 The Prince of Whales shadowed the Bismarck for the next three days, but never attempting to engage again. The Prince of Whales did not survive the war she was sunk by the Japanese in December 1941!
Outdated planes flying into the largets battleship commisioned in the atlantic. Those pilots have balls of steel, facing a battleship firing all it's guns.
I know people have said this already but damn, those pilots have serious balls. Mainly knowing that if you're hit you're history, amazing bravery. It's this kind of bravery against insane odds that won the war for us.
@Danmara Then The King George V Class ships, Nelson Class Ships and Aircraft Carriers would have arrived and some serious shit would have hit the fan!
@Danmara The Tirpitz wasn't even commissioned when the Bismarck was still afloat. But I'd agree that they shouldn't had left Bismarck to fend for herself.
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,,
Churchill after hearing about POW break off the action wanted to Court Martial her captain. Admiral Tovey told him he would resign if this was to happen. A few months later Churchill was being taken across the Atlantic in POW under the same captain he had wanted to Court Martial, they got on very well together! Captain Leech went down with POW a few months later, his son became and admiral in the time of the Falkands War.
52 AA guns... well if you compare that to other ships of that period of time, Bismarck was pretty well armed against aircraft. The Only problem, they got a little too fast with the technology - even in 1942 some of the ship used heavy machine guns as AA protection, in case of slow-moving targets.
@Wykletypl you are 100% correct. the germans assumed that the british aircraft carriers would be just as advanced as the Graf Zeppelin, and would carry aircraft similar to what the GZ would carry, and what the IJN had. however, the british were far behind the germans and the IJN in carriers and aircraft. shoulda, coulda, woulda.
d british were the biggest mass murderers in history....looting, pillaging and destroying nations during colonialism. they stole soo much money frm these nations in trillions of dollars.
Where are all the tards who keep crying 'OMG this is just American Propoganda' and 'Is always only about American battles, WTF?!" Where are these retards now?
@blindbumblbee Yeah i can understand that, but here is the problem. Most anti-aircraft are absolutely useless at that time since aiming was near impossible since proximity detonation was not being used by the Germans (i think not at least). I find it annoying that such a great battleship would go down the way it did.
It was the 'Empire Cruise' that cost us the Hood: She was meant to have her decks strengthened, but was too busy travelling the world 'flying the flag.'
not sure, i guess they felt that it was better to operate in smaller numbers, and they would be harder to find. Then there was also the small size of the german navy.....
I think a better question is why they didnt wait until tirpiz was ready, by that stage the twins would have been finished theoir refit, then have all 4 meet in the denmark strait........
I guess its what happens when rush trying to prove something (justifying a surface fleet).
the sad thing is that there wasnt. Basically one branch of the navy wanted the focus o be on u-boats, the other a surface fleet. and when it seemed that the war might be won within the year, the people wanting the surface fleet wanted to prove their value, and to ensure that they didnt miss out on 'their part' in the war. So instead of waiting until tirpiz was ready, and instead of finishing the aircraft carrier
(and actually organising carrier planes, which thanks to georing they couldn't), and better organising it with the airforce and submarines(aswell as other surface units), they rushed an idea to 'prove' their worth and paid the price.
@Silmacar or the fact that the Nazi's were big headed and thought their ship waz invincible so they only sent it out with 1 other ship or hitler just didnt know what he was doing like most of the time...... :D
In this mission, Bismarck and Prinz Eugen were intended as a raiding party, to attack convoys and their escorts - they weren't meant to tangle with heavier warships.
Stealth and surprise were their modus operandi - The Brits wanted to prevent them from breaking free into the Atlantic, which is why they hounded the Bismarck until they either sunk it, or forced it back into safer waters.
@Silmacar Fighting in Norway basically left the Kriegsmarine without Destroyers and Cruisers. Anyway Bismarck and Prinz Eugen were both supposed to be doing long range convoy raiding which involved long periods of high speed cruising. Both ships lacked the ability to refuel other ships at sea. So attaching lighter vessels to them probably just wasn't a good idea.
@starwarsfandude Cheated how? By building ships as large and as powerful as they could? I have all the respect for the crew of the HMS Hood and for the last salvo they fired as the ship was going down, but who is the United Kingdom to tell other countries what they can and cannot build? Those pacts that limited the size of Germany's ships were cheating. It was a war, there are no rules and pacts.
@alxcsb The treaty of Washington applied to all relevant nations, Britain abided by it or the Royal Navy would've had the most powerful ships afloat (new bigger class designs were scrapped due to the treaty).Germany were still bound under the treaty of Versailles, which they completely ignored. And if there are no rules..what is the Geneva convention?
+1 if the RN has ever been good at something its at having BIG battleships. if they didn't abide by the rules they surely would've had ships that would make the bismark look like a dingy. that may be an exageration but you know what i mean
@simpsonfan13 Agreed..and don't take this the wrong way but I'm pleasantly surprised that you're from the U.S. and saying that. Usually there's some kind of ludicrous animosity on here between folks from 2 countries who are supposed to be close allies, I'm really glad you've bucked the trend!:)
+1 if the RN has ever been good at something its at having BIG battleships. if they didn't abide by the rules they surely would've had ships that would make the bismark look like a dingy. that may be an exaggeration but you know what i mean
Unfortunately the G3 class battlecruisers and the N3 class battleships were canceled. The battlecruisers alone would have been more than twice the worth of the old ships that were retained.
No she didn't. The problem being like Bismarck she relied on optical fire control systems. More importantly during the battle which this program fails to mention. The British ships had the wind in their faces and the sun behind their enemies. This interfered with the fire control systems. Where as latter analog computers unlike a human gunner could calculate wind speed, ship speed, shell weight, muzzle velocity, and distance to target. All that with a high degree of accuracy.
@thatkidinthegreenhat I still get a kick out of the video calling Bismarck "Hitler's super weapon". I mean, is he kidding? Their was literally nothing particularly different or spectacular about Bismarck or Tirpitz compared to anyone else's battleships.
Superweapons they were not. Although one can argue when used as a fleet in being they did accomplish something. Tirpitz sat for along time in Norway and the Allies especially the UK contributed many ships to try to destroy her. This actually influenced Winston Churchill to send Prince of Wales and Repulse to Singapore. Now while Tirpitz was hiding behind her anti-torpedo nets, hundreds of thousands of anti-aircraft guns, hundreds of fighters and bombers, and large numbers of coastal artillery.
Yeah but to be honest, what else was the Royal Navy going to do? Sit in port the whole war? The Royal Navy did not end up expending unacceptable resources controlling German Capital Ships during either World War. It was Germany who ended up paying the far higher price both times around. To be honest, I think the entire concept of "Fleet in Being" is total horseshit. FiB is generally only used by countries who should never have had a fleet in the first place.
"who should never have had a fleet in the first place. " I have to disagree there. As much of an Anglophile as I am who ever said the UK could do what ever it wants. As far as controlling the seas. The idea behind the High Seas Fleet, and the dreams of its creators and admirals was simple. To give Germany her place in the sun. How come the UK and France could have great empires and not Germany? Same as Japan, Italy, and even a lesser extent the USA. Although in the end the USA was actually able
@thatkidinthegreenhat Nationalistic ideologies and dreams are not what win wars though. If Germany wanted "its place in the sun" , it should have just accepted its overseas colonies and short term ambitions were pointless. The German Empire's colonies were not so important so as to warrant a huge battlefleet.
That is why Japan, Italy, Germany, and even the USA built their own fleets. Even if protecting its colonies were not important that didn't matter to them. The battleship then was the only means of projecting power. Germany like all those other countries had the battleship fetish. Even when the uncertainty of the battleship in future conflicts came about nations still clung to them. It was about the prestige of having them. If your country's navy didn't have a battleship in it then it wasn't
Yes but all of the powers you just named had overseas colonies and assets away from their homelands. It was perfectly necessary for all of them to maintain assets powerful enough to defend their sea lanes. Germany had no relevant sea lanes to its colonies. The one country it relied on the most for export goods, Britain, it ended up going to war with because of its fleet. Their is a reason mass famine forced the Kaiser to abdicate in 1918.
The base at Singapore was nowhere near complete. No effective air cover. Batteries of 15in guns that had no high explosive shells. Barely and anti-aircraft artillery. This I guess was supposed to intimidate the Japanese who had 10 gun capital ships.
he didnt want to shoot at them at all,the captain of bismarck gave the order to return fire he over ruled the admiral,he did right,he should have finsihed off the prince of wales aswell,i bet the british woudnt have let a ship go,to much of this gentleman shit in the german navy
@TheOceanEnterprise Lutjens had orders to avoid any unneccesary combat with British warships. Her mission was comerce raiding, not engaging enemy warships.
@feliciter84 I notice that they repeat footage ALL the time on Battle 360 even if its a different episode they will use the same animation that they made from another battle
i mean of course a hypothetical situation where the aircraft careers don't dominate the seas in the WWII... because with them even the colossal Yamato-class battleships (the biggest military vessels ever) were useless , even if they were very hard to sink - one of them , i don't remember which one, Musashi or Yamato, took 19 torpedoes an some 15 or so bombs before it was destroyed... and as you see on the video, the british needed half of the Royal Navy to sink Bismarck.
Just to conclude...I think if it was your cities, men, women and children being bombed everyday you wuould feel differently. It's easy to preach when looking at it from the outside.
@29Gixxer well, i'm from Poland , a country that has lost the biggest percentage of it's citizens during WW II, and I think there's no family where noone was killed. 40,000 people was like, 4 days of Auschwitz-Birkenau working at full efficiency. But I still don't feel like killing innocent people in revenge is justified. They should've had no mercy when it was necesarry for military action, but Dresden wasn't such a case - it was just a mass murder .
It's a shame you don't feel the same way about the Blitz man. To imply that it;s ok for the Germans to start bombing our civilians but when we retaliate...we are then in the wrong is absurd. That's basically saying that Germany has the right to mass kill us but we cannot do it back. Was London a target of military significance?...Coventry?
and to come back to the topic of the video: well, Bismarck was not more outdated than all the other WWII battleships were. She was lucky to at least participate in a real battleship clash and sink the RN's pride, while her sister - Tirpitz - was just a 'fleet in being'. She would have massacred the convoys hadn't she been sunk , as no single british vessel could sink her , and it's impossible to escort each convoy with a fleet of battleships. And the Americans were busy on Pacific Ocean.
52 anti-aircraft guns? Wow. Bismarck was a statement. A statement that had to be sunk for the sake of the rest of the world. German engineering has always been exceptional.......and copied.
color - colour, neighbor - neighbour etc etc, depends on in which english speaking country you like - in the US theres no "u" in these kind of words, get it? cool.
@greg50, Prince Oigen was only a heavy cruiser and couldnt take on battleships like Rodney and King George V. Bismarck couldnt steer so her fete was already sealed. Prince Oigen would have been a delaying tactic but would only be a matter of time before she went down too.
@zepsterboy i thought that first too. but when you rethink it there would have been more AA fire to shoot down the swordfishes. also Prince Eugen could have towed Bismarck if it still would have been hit. the 130k BHP from the Eugens engines would have been enough to tow the mighty battleship. Bismarck himself had 150k BHP. IMO it was the weather that sunk the Bismarck. without the stormy seas the crew could have freed the rudders then.
yes, exactly. but im not suggesting that the speed would be anywhere near the usual cruise speeds.
you're saing that towboats with a combined maximum displacement of some 10000 can tow a battleship like bismarck/tirpitz and a singel unit with a displacement of some 20000 and far more horsepower cant? anyway bismarck still had her propoltion system, but needed assistance in manouvering and PE could have helped Bismarck out with that.
My point was just that the USA's 1st & only attack on home soil came on 9/11 mate.
Pearl Harbour was terrible but it's a different ball game when your homeland is attacked. It installs fear throught the public although we were lucky in WW2 becuase it had the opposite effect, it galvanized our public.
Everyone was a different breed back then. Where has happened to our faith in our own self- confidence? I understand exactly what you mean 29. People are weak kneed and pathetic nowadays. If this event had been 9/11/41, there would have been hell to pay. If this day had been 11/16/49, I doubt that Al Qaeda would even exist today. No doubt, this galvanized our public in modern times (9/11/01), but not nearly to the extent it should have.
Yeah people all over the world are fickle nowadays and soon forget & go back to their football, playstation etc.
There's a simple reason why this breakdown has occured mate. It's becuase our societies have become inter mixed so much that there's not the same cohesion amonst the people. We are now more divided than ever.
The rich elite have had to do this due to new media sources like the internet/TV as this is how they maintain their dominance :)
@29Gixxer Really yeah I am sure the only attack on USA homeland was 9/11 um here is the thing dumbass you probraly never heard of the war of 1812 yeah the British came back landed on our homeland and burned down our capital.
What are you ranting about lol. When I say 'attack' on the mainland...I mean it's civilians being attacked. USA has only ever had it's civilians attacked on the mainland once and that was 9/11. Part burning down the whitehouse is one thing....having 40,000 people killed in a sustained bombiing campaign aover months is quite another.
@29Gixxer You were speaking geographically mainland as in the 48 continental states or times before the British landed here in 1812 which proves your political theory wrong you should had said mainland citizens rather then mainland mainland you speak geographical mainland people is populasole or poltical in a way.
@29Gixxer I know 9/11 was bad in its 1.5 hours but don't call it tea party a tea party is an act in which involves tea and a series of people haveing a delicate tea party or social tea your definiton is wrong unless you mean Boston tea party I fully belive that the blitz was worse as hospitals and serive areas were attacked but don't call 9/11 a tea party because it was as gruesome as the blitz, the Titanic, the bubonic plague, and other large disasters causing great loss of life.
Note I said 'in comparrison' mate. I'm not wrong...the US public has not been subjected to anything near the level of military violence that the UK public has my friend. Not to say that's a good or bad thing tho...it's just the way it is.
@29Gixxer Oh yes I perfeclt understand the UK had suffered more in WW2 than the US do to the fact that the civillians were bombed the troops were almost destroyed in the Asian colonies and in Africa until Montgomery arrived
Appolgies for being sarky on 9/11. To be fair to you....it's unfair to use that as my generatoin has not suffered an attack on the 9/11 scale anyway. The real shame is that it takes something like the Blitz/9/11 to bring the people together. In times of peace we are soft....that goes for both USA and UK....
The Bismarck and the Hood were evenly Matched in Fire Power and Experience in Man Power as well as their Respective Captains.
The Prince of Wales and its Crew on the other hand were New and were not properly Trained like the Crew of the Hood, also the ship was still being Fitted when it set sailed, hence the massive Mechanical Failures that were happening during the battle and not to mention, Civilian Workers were still on board.
Bismark had more range, more fire power, more belt and deck and most importantly supperior FCS to the UK from my memory and what i read. I dont think they are equal, for some reason bismark fought hood, within hoods range, instead of sitting back and picking it off. either way that outcome was set in stone for hood.
@EvilFingers Their crews were arguably evenly matched but as far as their weapons systems go the HMS Hood was outmatched. She was an outdated and heavily over modified battlecruiser pitted against a modern advanced super battleship. Her hull was never designed to displace the additional tonnage of those upgrades. BCs were not designed to engage BBs.
They were both beautiful ships but unfortunately Hood's crew had to be deployed in a fight that had her at a clear disadvantage.
Well arent Battle Cruisers still considered Battleships, considering they still boast an X amount of main guns as those on a Battleship in the Atlantic.
Also dont forget, the Hood was scheduled to be refitted with an Armored Deck, but due the course of France surrendering to Germany in 1941 and what was currently happening in the Atlantic, the Refitting couldnt be done and the Royal Navy needed every ship of the line in service to cover the Atlantic and the Mediterranean.
No. The problem is that battlecruisers and battleships were both considered capital ships. In the eyes of the public and politicians this meant they were one in the same. Incorrect. In the Royal Navy the innovators of the battlecruiser was intend as the successor to the armored cruiser. Their concept being a ship the size of a battleship, mounting the same caliber rifles, but with reduced armor protection. Saving weight by reducing protection and on a hull the same length of a battleship
@thatkidinthegreenhat "Battlecruiser" is another dangerous exercise in semantics; it sounds deadly but never really worked either at Jutland or the Denmark Straits, although BCs did well at the first Battle of the Falklands doing what they were designed for: hunting armored cruiser.. They were not the only misconception pushed through by Fisher's reputation, including poor old Courageous buckling in high seas or Furious wounding only itself with its 18 inch gun. Enjoy your insights!
I never said it worked. The battlecruiser even in a time when airplanes were not an effective force really didn't full fill and effective role. They were used in the Battle of Jutland and look what happened. 3 blew up. Same as Hood in 1941. Perhaps the UK should have just built more battleships than building battlecruisers. Building 2 more Revenge class battleships instead of the Renown class. With that said during World War 2 only the UK's battlecruisers had the speed to escort carriers.
I never said it worked. The battlecruiser even in a time when airplanes were not an effective force really didn't full fill and effective role. They were used in the Battle of Jutland and look what happened. 3 blew up. Same as Hood in 1941. Perhaps the UK should have just built more battleships than building battlecruisers. Building 2 more Revenge class battleships instead of the Renown class. With that said during World War 2 only the UK's battlecruisers had the speed to escort carriers.
@thatkidinthegreenhat But they did not know Hitler would invade countries until the late 1930s as they prepared Hitler moved quickly to attack then when he got the coast he go to attack Great Britiain by sea but failed so don't build more Revenge class ships the British won the German blockade failed lets keep everything how it is unless yoiu wanted Hitler to win that is a different story
First of all your comment is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. First of all the N3 and G3 classes were planned in the 20s. Hitler did not come to power until 1933. In 1936 he made his first move retaking the Rhineland. Then in 1938 Anschluss happened. Why you are talking about building more Revenge class ships I have no idea. "unless yoiu wanted Hitler to win that is a different story" Everyone here by now realizes I am an Anglophile.
I never said it worked. The battlecruiser even in a time when airplanes were not an effective force really didn't full fill and effective role. They were used in the Battle of Jutland and look what happened. 3 blew up. Same as Hood in 1941. Perhaps the UK should have just built more battleships than building battlecruisers. Building 2 more Revenge class battleships instead of the Renown class. With that said during World War 2 only the UK's battlecruisers had the speed to escort carriers.
I never said it worked. The battlecruiser even in a time when airplanes were not an effective force really didn't full fill and effective role. They were used in the Battle of Jutland and look what happened. 3 blew up. Same as Hood in 1941. Perhaps the UK should have just built more battleships than building battlecruisers. Building 2 more Revenge class battleships instead of the Renown class. With that said during World War 2 only the UK's battlecruisers had the speed to escort carriers.
combined with same machinery producing higher top speed. The battlecruiser would be used to hunt down and destroy enemy cruisers attempting cruiser warfare. To protect British merchant shipping. They would also perform reconnaissance for the main fleet. They would sweep enemy cruisers from the seas to preventing vital recon info from reaching the enemy. However they could not stand in the battleline against battleships. The German concept was different. Retaining the armor of a battleship, but
reducing the caliber of the rifles. This would reduce the weight of the guns and their mountings. Even if Hood had been refitted it still would not have been enough. Her armor protection was only just good enough for Jutland era weapons. It was outclassed by post-World War 1 weapons. Especially the 16in guns developed. When she was built armor was hastely added. This lowered her freeboard and putting greater stress on her supporting structure. Any more armor added would have added more weight.
@EvilFingers In a nutshell, both warships are capital type vessels but with completely different roles in WWI battle fleet warfare. BCs and BBs are nearly the same in all stats except in spd and armor defense systems. BCs had reduced armor to allow them greater spd. As a result BCs became effective and feared hunters capable of pursuing and engaging threat cruisers. It was the same fleet role that cruisers fulfilled by hunting and killing torpedo destroyers (forerunners of DDs) in WWI .
The Prince Eugen was turned over to the allies after WW2. It was used in the "Bravo" nuclear test at Bikini atoll in the Marshall Islands. It's now resting 3/4 way over on it's side(underwater) in the Kwajalein lagoon in the Marshalls. I've dove on the Prince many times.
wtf is the matter with the sound on all these videos ??
climax522 3 days ago
fairey swordfish vs bismarck = x wing vs deathstar
obifongkenobi 1 month ago
6:32 no torpedo
7:03 torpedo pops up!
speedenforcer918 1 month ago
I realize that the use of radar, even at this stage in WW2, would negate the effectiveness of such a smoke screen in attempting to obscure themselves/evade. I'm sure both sides didn't know exactly how advanced either side's radar technology was, so no harm in trying the old trick.
clearlogicify 1 month ago
The HMS Prince of Wales "makes smoke" was simply an attempt to evade/reduce the chance taking hits, or was it a some kind of signal she's disengaging and unable to fight? "makes smoke" could easily mean the engines were pushed to max output to attempt to out-speed the enemy, and not purposefulness making smoke.
I know smoke screens were used by various ships for various reason (though it rarely show in documentaries), just wondering what "makes smoke" meant in this case.
clearlogicify 1 month ago
I myself enjoy the video, but to all you bastards who disrespect the brave sailors on both the hood and Bismarck, why?
USSINDYCA35 2 months ago
1,477 men went down with the Hood... Just think.
elithompandre8266 3 months ago in playlist More videos from kingtiger88
@elithompandre8266 3 survivors out of 1,480 men
Davis4037 2 months ago
Poor quality signal!!? Booo, I'm not watching this. I want my money back! oh...wait....
ELconchesumare 4 months ago
what eventaully happened to h.m.s prince of whales?
jnevins1234 4 months ago
@jnevins1234
In this Battle she "retired"/fled from the battle. returned to port and was repaired.
She was later sunk with Repulse in the pacific by the japanese. As "luck" would have it a single torp hit her aft where one of her shafts entered the hull rendering her immobile and in a sinking condition. She as well as Repulse were sunk.
notsureyou 4 months ago
@jnevins1234 The Prince of Whales shadowed the Bismarck for the next three days, but never attempting to engage again. The Prince of Whales did not survive the war she was sunk by the Japanese in December 1941!
MrMichaelPS 2 months ago
@MrMichaelPS "Prince of Wales". "Whales" are marine mammals. "Wales" is a country in Great Britain.
marcotorricellivideo 2 months ago
I love this video
Jnharrell1 4 months ago
Maybe their vison is based on movement. If I fly real slow they can't see me. Yep Balls of steel! Thanks for the show!
Thestealthfighterguy 5 months ago
Outdated planes flying into the largets battleship commisioned in the atlantic. Those pilots have balls of steel, facing a battleship firing all it's guns.
Thearbiter84 5 months ago
Royal Navy not british navy
Nwfcocks23 5 months ago
I know people have said this already but damn, those pilots have serious balls. Mainly knowing that if you're hit you're history, amazing bravery. It's this kind of bravery against insane odds that won the war for us.
TaZ101SAGA 5 months ago
Imagine if Tirpiz, Sharnhorst, Deutchland and some u-boats have gone to help Bismark ....
Danmara 5 months ago 2
@Danmara Then The King George V Class ships, Nelson Class Ships and Aircraft Carriers would have arrived and some serious shit would have hit the fan!
sthill1993 4 months ago
@Danmara The Tirpitz wasn't even commissioned when the Bismarck was still afloat. But I'd agree that they shouldn't had left Bismarck to fend for herself.
speedenforcer918 2 months ago
@speedenforcer918
I know my friend, thats why i`ve start it with imagine :).
Danmara 2 months ago
who ever commented on me that was mean.
good19100 7 months ago
hey who ever commented on me that was not nice oops sry wrong name
smileybubbles73 7 months ago
hey who ever commented on me that was not nice
smileybubbles73 7 months ago
BALLS OF STEEL!
cajohnson1234 7 months ago
im giving a moment of silence
good19100 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 8 months ago
@10mism we are both in the EU. so, we are allies wether you like it or not.
But i dont trust Germans. So if you give it another go, we will crush you again for the third time.
lovelock512 8 months ago
@lovelock512 hey dont let hi9m have what he wants attation
good19100 7 months ago
@lovelock512 well Germany is the biggest Econmy in Europe so we all ahve to Co-Operate
jasincl 7 months ago
@10mism uh think again u started it by attacking britan and japan put us into the war becareful or i might report u
good19100 7 months ago
@good19100 technically, it was attacking Poland that started the war.
'sides, he's just a troll.
Now please stop playing to the "herp derp imma dum American" stereotype and use proper grammar and spelling.
mager56723 7 months ago
her majesty's dumbasses...
phsjr 8 months ago
They should of hung those fake rubber balls off of every swordfish in that squadron.
3ISAMAGICNUMBR 8 months ago
bismarck made a big error to break off with Prinz Eugen.... if Prinz Eugen was there it would go beter!
BlackDHbatman 9 months ago
@volteer911 You were there, of course, to make such a statement?
SuperQuiller 9 months ago
The German strategy is simple: put shells on the target.
Sorry for the sarcasm.. I almost cried to the tradegy...
R.I.P Bismarck and Hood and their crew...
R.I.P
TheMourningBlade 10 months ago
@TheMourningBlade Yeah, isn't that ALWAYS the strategy. Unless we're talking Spaceballs. "Careful you idiot I said across her nose not up it!"
trojanhorsealpha 9 months ago
i got poor quality signal on my youtube...
sid009 11 months ago 11
Churchill after hearing about POW break off the action wanted to Court Martial her captain. Admiral Tovey told him he would resign if this was to happen. A few months later Churchill was being taken across the Atlantic in POW under the same captain he had wanted to Court Martial, they got on very well together! Captain Leech went down with POW a few months later, his son became and admiral in the time of the Falkands War.
pointy2 11 months ago
52 AA guns... well if you compare that to other ships of that period of time, Bismarck was pretty well armed against aircraft. The Only problem, they got a little too fast with the technology - even in 1942 some of the ship used heavy machine guns as AA protection, in case of slow-moving targets.
Wykletypl 11 months ago
@Wykletypl you are 100% correct. the germans assumed that the british aircraft carriers would be just as advanced as the Graf Zeppelin, and would carry aircraft similar to what the GZ would carry, and what the IJN had. however, the british were far behind the germans and the IJN in carriers and aircraft. shoulda, coulda, woulda.
akulaknight 11 months ago
d british were the biggest mass murderers in history....looting, pillaging and destroying nations during colonialism. they stole soo much money frm these nations in trillions of dollars.
IowaEngineering 11 months ago
@MasterJericho85
maybe the day of the big gun will return........
notsureyou 1 year ago 2
@notsureyou yes maybe in the future the battleships will now use rail guns or linear guns. And it is more devastating than ballistic projectiles.
razorsharpview9090 1 year ago
Where are all the tards who keep crying 'OMG this is just American Propoganda' and 'Is always only about American battles, WTF?!" Where are these retards now?
Tebok73509 1 year ago 2
50 anti aircraft firing at you as you fly headfirst into them 60 ft above an ocean.Only three words come to mind balls of steel
blindbumblbee 1 year ago 42
@blindbumblbee very funny....lol
JEREX101 1 year ago
@blindbumblbee three other words in two phrases come to my mind: 'Never give up' and 'tough as nails'.
Fireheart528 1 year ago
@blindbumblbee most be Chuck norris in that torp bomber
Bonanoqc 1 year ago
@blindbumblbee Yeah i can understand that, but here is the problem. Most anti-aircraft are absolutely useless at that time since aiming was near impossible since proximity detonation was not being used by the Germans (i think not at least). I find it annoying that such a great battleship would go down the way it did.
MrLittlelawyer 1 week ago
then poor quality :(
UberMonsterDude 1 year ago
poor HOOD..... suddenly Torpedoes
UberMonsterDude 1 year ago
It was the 'Empire Cruise' that cost us the Hood: She was meant to have her decks strengthened, but was too busy travelling the world 'flying the flag.'
cholliday666 1 year ago 2
It's hard to believe the Hood got sunk that fast by just one shell....
OldSkoolgamerz 1 year ago
What I really don't understand is why the Germans sent Prinz Eugen and Bismarck without a supporting fleet of destroyers and/or light cruisers.
Silmacar 1 year ago
@Silmacar
not sure, i guess they felt that it was better to operate in smaller numbers, and they would be harder to find. Then there was also the small size of the german navy.....
I think a better question is why they didnt wait until tirpiz was ready, by that stage the twins would have been finished theoir refit, then have all 4 meet in the denmark strait........
I guess its what happens when rush trying to prove something (justifying a surface fleet).
notsureyou 1 year ago
@notsureyou or there could have been some stratigic thougths about it
digimanga 1 year ago
@digimanga
the sad thing is that there wasnt. Basically one branch of the navy wanted the focus o be on u-boats, the other a surface fleet. and when it seemed that the war might be won within the year, the people wanting the surface fleet wanted to prove their value, and to ensure that they didnt miss out on 'their part' in the war. So instead of waiting until tirpiz was ready, and instead of finishing the aircraft carrier
notsureyou 1 year ago
(and actually organising carrier planes, which thanks to georing they couldn't), and better organising it with the airforce and submarines(aswell as other surface units), they rushed an idea to 'prove' their worth and paid the price.
notsureyou 1 year ago
@Silmacar or the fact that the Nazi's were big headed and thought their ship waz invincible so they only sent it out with 1 other ship or hitler just didnt know what he was doing like most of the time...... :D
digimanga 1 year ago
@digimanga
In this mission, Bismarck and Prinz Eugen were intended as a raiding party, to attack convoys and their escorts - they weren't meant to tangle with heavier warships.
Stealth and surprise were their modus operandi - The Brits wanted to prevent them from breaking free into the Atlantic, which is why they hounded the Bismarck until they either sunk it, or forced it back into safer waters.
carlosdfc 1 year ago
@Silmacar Fighting in Norway basically left the Kriegsmarine without Destroyers and Cruisers. Anyway Bismarck and Prinz Eugen were both supposed to be doing long range convoy raiding which involved long periods of high speed cruising. Both ships lacked the ability to refuel other ships at sea. So attaching lighter vessels to them probably just wasn't a good idea.
CaptHawkeye 1 year ago
@Silmacar good question maybe Prinz Eugen was busy with Prinzessin Lisa.
StrictlyBG 1 year ago
poor signal...
SuperWeng10 1 year ago
POOR SIGNAL!? WHAT!? D:<
RandomLOLROFLMAO 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
3000+ innocent people on 9/11..RIP
Maoud2 1 year ago
if the prince of whales guns were not jamd that ship would inflict louds of damaged but would probably get sunk though
mrclaytonio 1 year ago
@mrclaytonio It's not Whales pal, it wasn't the prince of the largest mammals on earth, it's Wales, as in the country, you know?
alxcsb 1 year ago
everyone is happy that the ship sank, no one is happy that that many died
xomanowar42 1 year ago
If only the dang Germans hadn't cheated, the British would have actualy had a fighting chance. We are lucky that the Bismarck was destroyed.
starwarsfandude 1 year ago
@starwarsfandude Cheated how? By building ships as large and as powerful as they could? I have all the respect for the crew of the HMS Hood and for the last salvo they fired as the ship was going down, but who is the United Kingdom to tell other countries what they can and cannot build? Those pacts that limited the size of Germany's ships were cheating. It was a war, there are no rules and pacts.
alxcsb 1 year ago
@alxcsb The treaty of Washington applied to all relevant nations, Britain abided by it or the Royal Navy would've had the most powerful ships afloat (new bigger class designs were scrapped due to the treaty).Germany were still bound under the treaty of Versailles, which they completely ignored. And if there are no rules..what is the Geneva convention?
comanchio1976 1 year ago
@comanchio1976
+1 if the RN has ever been good at something its at having BIG battleships. if they didn't abide by the rules they surely would've had ships that would make the bismark look like a dingy. that may be an exageration but you know what i mean
simpsonfan13 1 year ago
@simpsonfan13 Agreed..and don't take this the wrong way but I'm pleasantly surprised that you're from the U.S. and saying that. Usually there's some kind of ludicrous animosity on here between folks from 2 countries who are supposed to be close allies, I'm really glad you've bucked the trend!:)
comanchio1976 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@comanchio1976
+1 if the RN has ever been good at something its at having BIG battleships. if they didn't abide by the rules they surely would've had ships that would make the bismark look like a dingy. that may be an exaggeration but you know what i mean
simpsonfan13 1 year ago
Unfortunately the G3 class battlecruisers and the N3 class battleships were canceled. The battlecruisers alone would have been more than twice the worth of the old ships that were retained.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
jesus people have some fucking respect......thousands of men died fighting so have a second and think you shallow wankers!!!!!
fucking vain people!!!!!
sandynathan 1 year ago 46
@sandynathan u hav some respect too...........u are too upseen................stop cursing.....i agree with u too but dont be so upseen
JEREX101 1 year ago
Great balls of fire
TheIrishryan 10 months ago
@sandynathan God rest the men who died on those fine ships. They died fighting for a cause THEY felt was just, and what greater honor is there?
MixmasterPhirePhox 10 months ago
get the fucking adverts off
vulpecula999 1 year ago
why do yanks always have to do these things with a hard-on.
and do they keep repeating the info as their audience is rather dense?
mmmbeachlover 1 year ago
Wait a minute. HMS Hood didn't score any hits on the DKM Bismarck?
Sokar2488 1 year ago
No she didn't. The problem being like Bismarck she relied on optical fire control systems. More importantly during the battle which this program fails to mention. The British ships had the wind in their faces and the sun behind their enemies. This interfered with the fire control systems. Where as latter analog computers unlike a human gunner could calculate wind speed, ship speed, shell weight, muzzle velocity, and distance to target. All that with a high degree of accuracy.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
@thatkidinthegreenhat Thanks for clearing that up.
Sokar2488 1 year ago
@thatkidinthegreenhat I still get a kick out of the video calling Bismarck "Hitler's super weapon". I mean, is he kidding? Their was literally nothing particularly different or spectacular about Bismarck or Tirpitz compared to anyone else's battleships.
CaptHawkeye 1 year ago
Superweapons they were not. Although one can argue when used as a fleet in being they did accomplish something. Tirpitz sat for along time in Norway and the Allies especially the UK contributed many ships to try to destroy her. This actually influenced Winston Churchill to send Prince of Wales and Repulse to Singapore. Now while Tirpitz was hiding behind her anti-torpedo nets, hundreds of thousands of anti-aircraft guns, hundreds of fighters and bombers, and large numbers of coastal artillery.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
@thatkidinthegreenhat
Yeah but to be honest, what else was the Royal Navy going to do? Sit in port the whole war? The Royal Navy did not end up expending unacceptable resources controlling German Capital Ships during either World War. It was Germany who ended up paying the far higher price both times around. To be honest, I think the entire concept of "Fleet in Being" is total horseshit. FiB is generally only used by countries who should never have had a fleet in the first place.
CaptHawkeye 1 year ago
"who should never have had a fleet in the first place. " I have to disagree there. As much of an Anglophile as I am who ever said the UK could do what ever it wants. As far as controlling the seas. The idea behind the High Seas Fleet, and the dreams of its creators and admirals was simple. To give Germany her place in the sun. How come the UK and France could have great empires and not Germany? Same as Japan, Italy, and even a lesser extent the USA. Although in the end the USA was actually able
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
@thatkidinthegreenhat Nationalistic ideologies and dreams are not what win wars though. If Germany wanted "its place in the sun" , it should have just accepted its overseas colonies and short term ambitions were pointless. The German Empire's colonies were not so important so as to warrant a huge battlefleet.
CaptHawkeye 1 year ago
That is why Japan, Italy, Germany, and even the USA built their own fleets. Even if protecting its colonies were not important that didn't matter to them. The battleship then was the only means of projecting power. Germany like all those other countries had the battleship fetish. Even when the uncertainty of the battleship in future conflicts came about nations still clung to them. It was about the prestige of having them. If your country's navy didn't have a battleship in it then it wasn't
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
ranked with the rest.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
@thatkidinthegreenhat
Yes but all of the powers you just named had overseas colonies and assets away from their homelands. It was perfectly necessary for all of them to maintain assets powerful enough to defend their sea lanes. Germany had no relevant sea lanes to its colonies. The one country it relied on the most for export goods, Britain, it ended up going to war with because of its fleet. Their is a reason mass famine forced the Kaiser to abdicate in 1918.
CaptHawkeye 1 year ago
to take the UK's place with out direct confrontation.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
The base at Singapore was nowhere near complete. No effective air cover. Batteries of 15in guns that had no high explosive shells. Barely and anti-aircraft artillery. This I guess was supposed to intimidate the Japanese who had 10 gun capital ships.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
if i am not wrong the admiral wants to show off the might of the german navy but destroying the pride of the british navy
lazyGURLx3 1 year ago
he didnt want to shoot at them at all,the captain of bismarck gave the order to return fire he over ruled the admiral,he did right,he should have finsihed off the prince of wales aswell,i bet the british woudnt have let a ship go,to much of this gentleman shit in the german navy
ThePanzerCross 1 year ago
Comment removed
TheOceanEnterprise 1 year ago
@TheOceanEnterprise Lutjens had orders to avoid any unneccesary combat with British warships. Her mission was comerce raiding, not engaging enemy warships.
Sokar2488 1 year ago
STRINGBAGS!!! one hell of an aircraft it outlasted the aircraft meant to replace it and the great thing is ones still flying
themightyPhantom 1 year ago
Why do these documentaries repeat the same information and footage over and over again? It gets on my nerves.
feliciter84 1 year ago
@feliciter84 I notice that they repeat footage ALL the time on Battle 360 even if its a different episode they will use the same animation that they made from another battle
conor4011 1 year ago
i mean of course a hypothetical situation where the aircraft careers don't dominate the seas in the WWII... because with them even the colossal Yamato-class battleships (the biggest military vessels ever) were useless , even if they were very hard to sink - one of them , i don't remember which one, Musashi or Yamato, took 19 torpedoes an some 15 or so bombs before it was destroyed... and as you see on the video, the british needed half of the Royal Navy to sink Bismarck.
panzerny 1 year ago
@panzerny
Just to conclude...I think if it was your cities, men, women and children being bombed everyday you wuould feel differently. It's easy to preach when looking at it from the outside.
29Gixxer 1 year ago
@29Gixxer well, i'm from Poland , a country that has lost the biggest percentage of it's citizens during WW II, and I think there's no family where noone was killed. 40,000 people was like, 4 days of Auschwitz-Birkenau working at full efficiency. But I still don't feel like killing innocent people in revenge is justified. They should've had no mercy when it was necesarry for military action, but Dresden wasn't such a case - it was just a mass murder .
panzerny 1 year ago
@panzerny
It's a shame you don't feel the same way about the Blitz man. To imply that it;s ok for the Germans to start bombing our civilians but when we retaliate...we are then in the wrong is absurd. That's basically saying that Germany has the right to mass kill us but we cannot do it back. Was London a target of military significance?...Coventry?
29Gixxer 1 year ago
and to come back to the topic of the video: well, Bismarck was not more outdated than all the other WWII battleships were. She was lucky to at least participate in a real battleship clash and sink the RN's pride, while her sister - Tirpitz - was just a 'fleet in being'. She would have massacred the convoys hadn't she been sunk , as no single british vessel could sink her , and it's impossible to escort each convoy with a fleet of battleships. And the Americans were busy on Pacific Ocean.
panzerny 1 year ago
Poor Quality Signal? :O
DarthOrbit 1 year ago
52 anti-aircraft guns? Wow. Bismarck was a statement. A statement that had to be sunk for the sake of the rest of the world. German engineering has always been exceptional.......and copied.
2SANFRANCISCO 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Raping the queen of britian...the hood got its skirt lifted up!
sheemsheem 2 years ago
....people died on that ship,,,have some respect dude youre just making a cock of yourself
sajuuk212 2 years ago 27
great the bismarck!!
ivan236721 2 years ago
color - colour, neighbor - neighbour etc etc, depends on in which english speaking country you like - in the US theres no "u" in these kind of words, get it? cool.
Belenor 2 years ago
Pow.
TheZuikaku 2 years ago
If Bismarck had stayed with Prince Oigen, I think she may have made it to France.
greg50 2 years ago
@greg50, Prince Oigen was only a heavy cruiser and couldnt take on battleships like Rodney and King George V. Bismarck couldnt steer so her fete was already sealed. Prince Oigen would have been a delaying tactic but would only be a matter of time before she went down too.
zepsterboy 2 years ago 2
@zepsterboy i thought that first too. but when you rethink it there would have been more AA fire to shoot down the swordfishes. also Prince Eugen could have towed Bismarck if it still would have been hit. the 130k BHP from the Eugens engines would have been enough to tow the mighty battleship. Bismarck himself had 150k BHP. IMO it was the weather that sunk the Bismarck. without the stormy seas the crew could have freed the rudders then.
inar64 2 years ago
@inar64 ssooooo youre suggesting that a ship with a maximun displacement of 18400 could tow a battleship of 50000+? I cant see it
sajuuk212 2 years ago
yes, exactly. but im not suggesting that the speed would be anywhere near the usual cruise speeds.
you're saing that towboats with a combined maximum displacement of some 10000 can tow a battleship like bismarck/tirpitz and a singel unit with a displacement of some 20000 and far more horsepower cant? anyway bismarck still had her propoltion system, but needed assistance in manouvering and PE could have helped Bismarck out with that.
inar64 2 years ago
@inar64 i didnt mean it wouldnt manage it at all, I'm suggesting its likely to get blown out the water whilst doing it
sajuuk212 2 years ago
Does displacement suddenly have a bearing on towing ability?
qw56q 2 years ago
it can...50,000 tons is a lot of weight so yes i would say it has an effect on towwing ability...
sajuuk212 2 years ago
No, i was talking about the displacement of the Prince Eugen
qw56q 2 years ago
of course, look at the relative size of tugs which can tow supertankers with a displacement of 500K +
fauxsham 1 year ago
the Name of the 2nd ship Prinz Eugen not Oigen :)
SWFaurora 2 years ago
I think it's just the pronounciation of Eugen - "Oigen" - that puts people off.
thestaggie 2 years ago
its Prince Eugen
GoodSmackUp 2 years ago
OK. I've got the spelling now.
greg50 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Harbor, not Harbour
USSIowaBattleship61 2 years ago
It's spelled Harbour in UK and Canada
kingtiger88 2 years ago 2
@kingtiger88 and new zealand
pramboy09 2 years ago
@jmb765;
My point was just that the USA's 1st & only attack on home soil came on 9/11 mate.
Pearl Harbour was terrible but it's a different ball game when your homeland is attacked. It installs fear throught the public although we were lucky in WW2 becuase it had the opposite effect, it galvanized our public.
They were a different breed back then...
29Gixxer 2 years ago 6
Everyone was a different breed back then. Where has happened to our faith in our own self- confidence? I understand exactly what you mean 29. People are weak kneed and pathetic nowadays. If this event had been 9/11/41, there would have been hell to pay. If this day had been 11/16/49, I doubt that Al Qaeda would even exist today. No doubt, this galvanized our public in modern times (9/11/01), but not nearly to the extent it should have.
jmb765 2 years ago
Yeah people all over the world are fickle nowadays and soon forget & go back to their football, playstation etc.
There's a simple reason why this breakdown has occured mate. It's becuase our societies have become inter mixed so much that there's not the same cohesion amonst the people. We are now more divided than ever.
The rich elite have had to do this due to new media sources like the internet/TV as this is how they maintain their dominance :)
29Gixxer 2 years ago
@29Gixxer Really yeah I am sure the only attack on USA homeland was 9/11 um here is the thing dumbass you probraly never heard of the war of 1812 yeah the British came back landed on our homeland and burned down our capital.
madhitler1 1 year ago
@madhitler1
What are you ranting about lol. When I say 'attack' on the mainland...I mean it's civilians being attacked. USA has only ever had it's civilians attacked on the mainland once and that was 9/11. Part burning down the whitehouse is one thing....having 40,000 people killed in a sustained bombiing campaign aover months is quite another.
UAS doesn't know the meaning of it dude....
29Gixxer 1 year ago
@29Gixxer You were speaking geographically mainland as in the 48 continental states or times before the British landed here in 1812 which proves your political theory wrong you should had said mainland citizens rather then mainland mainland you speak geographical mainland people is populasole or poltical in a way.
madhitler1 1 year ago
@madhitler1
No offence here but 9/11 was a tea party compared to the Blitz. 9/11 went on for a whole 1.5 hours.......
29Gixxer 1 year ago
@29Gixxer I know 9/11 was bad in its 1.5 hours but don't call it tea party a tea party is an act in which involves tea and a series of people haveing a delicate tea party or social tea your definiton is wrong unless you mean Boston tea party I fully belive that the blitz was worse as hospitals and serive areas were attacked but don't call 9/11 a tea party because it was as gruesome as the blitz, the Titanic, the bubonic plague, and other large disasters causing great loss of life.
madhitler1 1 year ago
@madhitler1
Note I said 'in comparrison' mate. I'm not wrong...the US public has not been subjected to anything near the level of military violence that the UK public has my friend. Not to say that's a good or bad thing tho...it's just the way it is.
29Gixxer 1 year ago
@29Gixxer Oh yes I perfeclt understand the UK had suffered more in WW2 than the US do to the fact that the civillians were bombed the troops were almost destroyed in the Asian colonies and in Africa until Montgomery arrived
madhitler1 1 year ago
@madhitler1 meh the Italians (no Offence italian people) SUCKED i mean 500 brit soldiers could easliy beat 3,000 italians :/
jasincl 1 year ago
@jasincl Then again, it took just six Italian marines to sink HMS Valiant and HMS Queen Elizabeth, while damaging HMS Jarvis too.
Silmacar 1 year ago
@madhitler1
Appolgies for being sarky on 9/11. To be fair to you....it's unfair to use that as my generatoin has not suffered an attack on the 9/11 scale anyway. The real shame is that it takes something like the Blitz/9/11 to bring the people together. In times of peace we are soft....that goes for both USA and UK....
29Gixxer 1 year ago
Poor quality signal. Lolz its at the end.
Myst3ryK1ll3r 2 years ago 2
The Bismarck and the Hood were evenly Matched in Fire Power and Experience in Man Power as well as their Respective Captains.
The Prince of Wales and its Crew on the other hand were New and were not properly Trained like the Crew of the Hood, also the ship was still being Fitted when it set sailed, hence the massive Mechanical Failures that were happening during the battle and not to mention, Civilian Workers were still on board.
EvilFingers 2 years ago 13
Bismark had more range, more fire power, more belt and deck and most importantly supperior FCS to the UK from my memory and what i read. I dont think they are equal, for some reason bismark fought hood, within hoods range, instead of sitting back and picking it off. either way that outcome was set in stone for hood.
Capelle79 2 years ago
@EvilFingers Their crews were arguably evenly matched but as far as their weapons systems go the HMS Hood was outmatched. She was an outdated and heavily over modified battlecruiser pitted against a modern advanced super battleship. Her hull was never designed to displace the additional tonnage of those upgrades. BCs were not designed to engage BBs.
They were both beautiful ships but unfortunately Hood's crew had to be deployed in a fight that had her at a clear disadvantage.
Lionwolf0777 1 year ago
@Lionwolf0777
Well arent Battle Cruisers still considered Battleships, considering they still boast an X amount of main guns as those on a Battleship in the Atlantic.
Also dont forget, the Hood was scheduled to be refitted with an Armored Deck, but due the course of France surrendering to Germany in 1941 and what was currently happening in the Atlantic, the Refitting couldnt be done and the Royal Navy needed every ship of the line in service to cover the Atlantic and the Mediterranean.
EvilFingers 1 year ago
No. The problem is that battlecruisers and battleships were both considered capital ships. In the eyes of the public and politicians this meant they were one in the same. Incorrect. In the Royal Navy the innovators of the battlecruiser was intend as the successor to the armored cruiser. Their concept being a ship the size of a battleship, mounting the same caliber rifles, but with reduced armor protection. Saving weight by reducing protection and on a hull the same length of a battleship
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
@thatkidinthegreenhat "Battlecruiser" is another dangerous exercise in semantics; it sounds deadly but never really worked either at Jutland or the Denmark Straits, although BCs did well at the first Battle of the Falklands doing what they were designed for: hunting armored cruiser.. They were not the only misconception pushed through by Fisher's reputation, including poor old Courageous buckling in high seas or Furious wounding only itself with its 18 inch gun. Enjoy your insights!
yamsid 1 year ago
I never said it worked. The battlecruiser even in a time when airplanes were not an effective force really didn't full fill and effective role. They were used in the Battle of Jutland and look what happened. 3 blew up. Same as Hood in 1941. Perhaps the UK should have just built more battleships than building battlecruisers. Building 2 more Revenge class battleships instead of the Renown class. With that said during World War 2 only the UK's battlecruisers had the speed to escort carriers.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
I never said it worked. The battlecruiser even in a time when airplanes were not an effective force really didn't full fill and effective role. They were used in the Battle of Jutland and look what happened. 3 blew up. Same as Hood in 1941. Perhaps the UK should have just built more battleships than building battlecruisers. Building 2 more Revenge class battleships instead of the Renown class. With that said during World War 2 only the UK's battlecruisers had the speed to escort carriers.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
@thatkidinthegreenhat But they did not know Hitler would invade countries until the late 1930s as they prepared Hitler moved quickly to attack then when he got the coast he go to attack Great Britiain by sea but failed so don't build more Revenge class ships the British won the German blockade failed lets keep everything how it is unless yoiu wanted Hitler to win that is a different story
madhitler1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
First of all your comment is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. First of all the N3 and G3 classes were planned in the 20s. Hitler did not come to power until 1933. In 1936 he made his first move retaking the Rhineland. Then in 1938 Anschluss happened. Why you are talking about building more Revenge class ships I have no idea. "unless yoiu wanted Hitler to win that is a different story" Everyone here by now realizes I am an Anglophile.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I never said it worked. The battlecruiser even in a time when airplanes were not an effective force really didn't full fill and effective role. They were used in the Battle of Jutland and look what happened. 3 blew up. Same as Hood in 1941. Perhaps the UK should have just built more battleships than building battlecruisers. Building 2 more Revenge class battleships instead of the Renown class. With that said during World War 2 only the UK's battlecruisers had the speed to escort carriers.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I never said it worked. The battlecruiser even in a time when airplanes were not an effective force really didn't full fill and effective role. They were used in the Battle of Jutland and look what happened. 3 blew up. Same as Hood in 1941. Perhaps the UK should have just built more battleships than building battlecruisers. Building 2 more Revenge class battleships instead of the Renown class. With that said during World War 2 only the UK's battlecruisers had the speed to escort carriers.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
combined with same machinery producing higher top speed. The battlecruiser would be used to hunt down and destroy enemy cruisers attempting cruiser warfare. To protect British merchant shipping. They would also perform reconnaissance for the main fleet. They would sweep enemy cruisers from the seas to preventing vital recon info from reaching the enemy. However they could not stand in the battleline against battleships. The German concept was different. Retaining the armor of a battleship, but
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
reducing the caliber of the rifles. This would reduce the weight of the guns and their mountings. Even if Hood had been refitted it still would not have been enough. Her armor protection was only just good enough for Jutland era weapons. It was outclassed by post-World War 1 weapons. Especially the 16in guns developed. When she was built armor was hastely added. This lowered her freeboard and putting greater stress on her supporting structure. Any more armor added would have added more weight.
thatkidinthegreenhat 1 year ago
@EvilFingers In a nutshell, both warships are capital type vessels but with completely different roles in WWI battle fleet warfare. BCs and BBs are nearly the same in all stats except in spd and armor defense systems. BCs had reduced armor to allow them greater spd. As a result BCs became effective and feared hunters capable of pursuing and engaging threat cruisers. It was the same fleet role that cruisers fulfilled by hunting and killing torpedo destroyers (forerunners of DDs) in WWI .
Lionwolf0777 1 year ago
So... what happened to Prinz Eugen? Not everyone at once, please. 8-)
NVanWendy 2 years ago
The Prince Eugen was turned over to the allies after WW2. It was used in the "Bravo" nuclear test at Bikini atoll in the Marshall Islands. It's now resting 3/4 way over on it's side(underwater) in the Kwajalein lagoon in the Marshalls. I've dove on the Prince many times.
nerblebun 2 years ago
Wow! Anyone who's actually dived on the ship is certainly qualified to answer! I wonder how it survived the war - hiding in a fiord, maybe?
Thanks for answering.
NVanWendy 2 years ago
According to Wikipedia, Prinz Eugen was left in the Atlantic to continue the raiding mission.
Eboreg2 2 years ago
He went back to the castle to wash his pants.
TheZuikaku 2 years ago