ok i need more info on this german battle ship.

I know british sunk it with their ships and Byplains with torpedos.

just want to know everything else about it.

__________________

P-40, P-51, and the Spitfire for my opinion these were the three best allied aircraft.

Go to KBismarck.com. This site has practically everything you would want to know about this beautiful and deadly battleship.

__________________
"Angriff, Ran, Versenken!"-Onkel Karl
"Sink 'Em All"-Uncle Charlie

wow thanks, now i know more about the battle ship.

__________________

P-40, P-51, and the Spitfire for my opinion these were the three best allied aircraft.

"Google and ye shall find"

__________________

U know, i havent thought of that, thanks.

__________________

P-40, P-51, and the Spitfire for my opinion these were the three best allied aircraft.

For some reason I think this great ship was over rated.

__________________

Facta non verba. "Deeds, not words"

how was it over rated, it was one of the best ships in the Pacific.

__________________

P-40, P-51, and the Spitfire for my opinion these were the three best allied aircraft.

Heh, did you actually read the site that was linked above? The Bismark never sailed in the Pacific. It was hunted down and sunk in the Atlantic ocean. Oh, and the Bismark sure was a pretty nifty ship, at the very least it was a menace just by itself. Imagine if they built a few more of them...

__________________
World War 2 Vault
WW2 Vault is a web site I am currently building and the main goal of the site is to be a major hub of World War 2 information and articles.

They did build one more of her class...Tirpitz.

__________________
"Angriff, Ran, Versenken!"-Onkel Karl
"Sink 'Em All"-Uncle Charlie

The Bismarck was over-rated. Given that it weighed in at roughly 45,000 tons and only carried 8 15" guns for its main battery, 12 6" single purpose secondaries and, 16 4" AA guns it was badly under armed for its weight. In addition, its belt was only 12.5" thick at most and alot of weight was wasted on intermediate armor that had been abandoned by everyone else as worthless.
Compare the Bismarck with the Iowa class. Both displace roughly the same amount. Yet, the Iowas have 9 16" guns, 20 5" dual purpose guns for their secondary armament, make about 3 to 5 knots more speed and have more armor. Even earlier Washington Naval Treaty US battleships with about 8,000 tons less displacement are better equipped even if about 2 knots slower.
Even the French Richelieu and Italian Vittorio Veneto classes are as good on less displacement. What this says is that the Germans put alot of useless weight into their design for little or no return.

Tough to say that better than the previous post, with the exception of...It was a "Pretty" ship.
Though I think virtually every nations Battleships were pretty, awe inspiring, majestic, fearsome, and the rest of those over used adjectives.
As weapons, not so much. Many took so long to complete/fit out that by the time they arrived on station, the tide of war, or the way it was fought had changed to something they were not intended to compete against.
There were a few times they saved the day, but not enough to validate their cost in the long run. Again an opinion. They were "crowd pleasers", but so are cotton candy & baloons.
Even shelling islands (IMO) was better left to cruisers (Brooklyn CLs) with their rapid firing six inchers (15 of em).
As anti-aircraft protection for carrier battle groups they were top notch, but BCs, and anti-aircraft CLs were just as good.
It did get alot of attention, and caused much fear, and used up many resources to keep it bottled up, track it down, destroy it, which may prove out to be its premier worth.

__________________
All opinions expressed here are those of "Little Green Men" and don't necessarily represent views, positions, policy, thoughts, actions, or anything else.

The HMS Hood had 8 15" guns.

If you live here in the UK Flying Tiger there is a magazine coming out on this very subject and you can build a model of it.

__________________
Regards, Richard

Really? how big is the model anyway?

__________________

P-40, P-51, and the Spitfire for my opinion these were the three best allied aircraft.

The magazine is in 140 issues called Build the Bismark and each week you have part of the wooden model which is 1:200 scale.

__________________
Regards, Richard

Just too add issue one costs 50P after that issue two on wards £4.99

__________________
Regards, Richard

wow, so how long does each issue take to get to you anyway?

__________________

P-40, P-51, and the Spitfire for my opinion these were the three best allied aircraft.

There was something about this model in the Newspapers today - the final result will cost you over £600 plus materials......

Just to add my two penn'orth, I agree that Bismark was over-rated but you have to admit that the mere threat of her existence ( and the Tirpitz, for that matter ) tied up huge a huge amount of British effort.

To this day, my Dad ( a teenager at the time ) remembers the announcement of the Hood being sunk - it was considered by the public to be a National disaster, a huge blow to morale.

__________________
"Stand by to pull me out of the seat if I get hit" - Guy Gibson

there was an advert on about this not too long ago

__________________

"The Dark lord and his companions have returned!" (insane giggling)

Was just thinking that it would have shortened the war probably by quite a bit if Germany had built half a dozen or so Bismarks.

interesting thought lwd in what way(s) ? for the German good or.... ?

Martin my father in law was on a Tin Can destroyer Tender in the Pacific in 41 onward and the discussion continued as a what if the KM starting getting their capital ships in with the Japanese what this would make of the US Pacific fleet ............ more ships to sink of course ! In seriousness there was some apprehension amongst some crews

Re: the Bismark and Tirpitz
IMHO: both = LST
LST = LARGE STATIONARY TARGET

The lesson of WW2 is that modern war is won by TECHNOLOGY.
(This months news is re a prototype Brit full metal-jacketed Carbon Fibre core tank, light enough to be air dropped into combat zones. Armoured to the max - actually a step up and wicked guns etc...) (See "Favorite Modern Tank" thread in "Military History")

It was astonishing advances in tank design & funnies, aircraft, radar, sonar, bomb sights, shell penetration, proximity fuses in shells, airborne fused shell explosion, aircraft mounted rockets, cannon shells, mines, Napalm, Phosphorus incenduries, torpedos, gun design, ABomb and on and on and on that won WW2 everywhere ouside of jungle "guerilla" warfare that is - which the poor Yanks and Soviets (in part) had to face.

The Bismark and Tirpitz were a final salute to an era long, long gone. Hitler knew it - they were a complete waste of time, energy and resources. The last thing he was was stupid. (I agree with Skunk Works (above) - Don't forget the HUGE lead time required for research and development for mega projects like this. By the time they were finished time had passed them by.)

Its too bad someone does not copy lostbombers.co.uk with databases of the Naval, Mediterranean and Asian theater losses, not to mention USAAF. (thinking of those brave, brave Swordfish pilots here.)
Mind you - just think of the crushing work load. I for one am sure not volunteering~