Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Worst Admiral

Discussion in 'The War at Sea' started by 2ndLegion, Nov 28, 2004.

  1. me262 phpbb3

    me262 phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,627
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Porter,TX
    via TanksinWW2
  2. me262 phpbb3

    me262 phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,627
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Porter,TX
    via TanksinWW2
    if that was the case , then the scharnhorst would be bigger and heavyer than the bismarck
    bismarck was over 50,000 fully loaded and the scharnhorts was 39,000
     
  3. Che_Guevara

    Che_Guevara New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,109
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Davy Jones's locker
    via TanksinWW2
  4. me262 phpbb3

    me262 phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,627
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Porter,TX
    via TanksinWW2
    bismarck overall lenght: 250.5 mts
    scharnhorst overall lenght : 229.8 mts
    bismarck beam: 36 mts
    scharhorst beam : 30 mts
    bismarck draught: 10.2 mts
    scharnhorst draught : 9.93

    not just smaller, but lighter and narrower
     
  5. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Given the appalling conditions under which the Battle of North Cape was fought, that's darned good shooting!
     
  6. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    The number of torpedo hits needed to kill a BB varied wildly during the war.

    FUSO: 1

    MUSASHI: 21

    BARHAM: 3

    OKLAHOMA: 4

    WEST VIRGINIA: 7

    ROYAL OAK: 1


    I'm going from memory on these figures, so if any of them are inaccurate and you have a more reliable figure, please supply it.
     
  7. Ebar

    Ebar New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    On a space station in geosynchronous orbit above y
    via TanksinWW2
    I think technically Royal Oak had several torps fired at her just most didn't work as advertised. Of course with all of her water tight door open Royal Oak never stood much of a chance.
     
  8. me262 phpbb3

    me262 phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,627
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Porter,TX
    via TanksinWW2
    that showed clearly the advantages of the radar!!!!
    scharnhorst also was equiped with it but it was damage at the start of the battle , leaving the ship blinded
     
  9. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Indeed. I saw a documentary a couple of years ago where an expedition went down to the wreck of the SCHARNHORST, ala Bob Ballard. She was in really bad shape, with incredible amounts of battle damage. The RN nailed her good.
     
  10. Ebar

    Ebar New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    On a space station in geosynchronous orbit above y
    via TanksinWW2
    I think they reckon she suffered at least a partial magazine detonation. I believe the hull forward of A turret is basically gone.
     
  11. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Yes, totally separated from the rest of the wreck, IIRC. She took a much worse beating than BISMARCK did, overall.
     
  12. me262 phpbb3

    me262 phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,627
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Porter,TX
    via TanksinWW2
    basically both got the same treatment, the difference was the armour, salmon been a battlecruiser got thinner armour, in comparison with the bismarck
     
  13. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    This is true, although I also think that the RN's gunnery was a lot better at North Cape than it was against BISMARCK.
     
  14. me262 phpbb3

    me262 phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,627
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Porter,TX
    via TanksinWW2
    indeed it was, since the DoY was equiped with radar, and that was a real advantage over anything, including the bismarck/tirpitz
     
  15. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Oh, absolutely. SCHARNHORST's return fire was nowhere near as accurate as what was being thrown at her, since she lacked the kind of gunnery radar the Brits had.
     
  16. me262 phpbb3

    me262 phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,627
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Porter,TX
    via TanksinWW2
    also the salmon's radar was put of out of services early in the battle, so the salmon was blind as a bat!!! :(
     
  17. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Which, in any naval battle, is exactly what you want your opponent to be. :cool:
     
  18. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    preciesly, the RN used it's raddar to guid it's fire. against that the Germans couldn't stand a chance
     
  19. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    And the fact that SCHARNHORST had become separated from her escorting destroyers didn't help her any.
     
  20. Quillin

    Quillin New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ghent, Belgium
    via TanksinWW2
    indeed, not exactly a wise decision of rear-admiral eric bey to sent those destroyers away but i don't think it would have made a difference. the weather and the constantly darkness and the snowstorm would make a torpedo attack completly fail. i think that if those destroyers were their, they would have probably sunk as well
     

Share This Page