Exactly 75 years ago today the battleship Bismark was sunk taking 2200 lives with her. RIP.
>>30080767
>sunk
Scuttled
>>30080767
>taking 2200 lives with her
More like 22.
F
Brb watching Sink The Bismark
Sunk before her time.
>brits are still mad she sunk the Hood
i hate Bismarck he fucking manipulated my messages and call his homies to invade my hood and won because they had trains n shit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KecIdlEAKhU
>>30080767
Scuttled, Britboo.
>>30080858
The Hood was scuttled
>>30080955
>The Hood was scuttled
Bless the 1500 or so who were happy to sacrifice themselves scuttling her so that 3 could survive
>>30080767
only good Nazi is dead Nazi. PS go back to /pol/ we are sick of you and want to talk weapons not stupid politics.
>>30080985
(you)
>>30080767
such a shame, would rather that the brits had captured it, and made a museum of it. shes soo fucking sexy
>>30080767
>[ jaws theme ]
>>30081015
what ask about the ship and her guns not bait that is going to attract every /pol/tard moron and britfag out there to shitpost what could have been a good naval thread. That being said at least it's not involving slav stuff.
>>30081049
>Brits
>Museum ships
That's not very politically correct to keep monuments to war.
>>30081049
>Brits
>museum
We didn't save our own ships, what makes you think this would have fared better?
Reminder that U-boats that came to pick up survivors were bombed even when they had a giant red cross flag on deck and radioed on all frequencies that they will simply pick up survivors
>>30081070
>>30081073
maybe they would have seen the light when they saw an actually good looking ship, not those crooked teeth british abominations.
too bad the americans nuked the orinz eugen too, I'm sure that ship would have been in use for a long time if it didnt get so fucking radioactive
More related to the tirpitz but this was a good watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXusKM5uX0s
>>30080767
>taking 2200 lives with her.
good
>>30081088
hehe yeah. fucking early commando raids were fucking crazy.
thats where bismarck was heading after taking the hit from PoW btw
>>30081082
British BBs of the era were absolutely disgusting in appearance. Absolutely no thought to aesthetics (or gun performance).
![wDkjmOq[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/DHrzgKP.jpg "wDkjmOq[1].jpg")
>>30081116
>OI M8, GIMME A KISS AND I'LL SHOW YE ME TATTERS
fucking slags
>>30080985
>>30081069
Go away summerfag. But before you do, read the sticky and realize the post is fine.
Then suck on the end of a mossberg.
>>30081070
You can visit the HMS Belfast right on the Thames.
>>30080767
>Bismark was sunk taking 2200 lives with her.
>Bismark was sunk
a tragedy
>taking 2200 lives with her
nobody cares
>>30080767
What's with the paint job on the hull?
>>30081141
I'm 39 buddy and have been around longer than you. it not the discussion in general but the /pol/ invasion we have seen the last couple years that makes me wish for better wording by op.
>>30081166
It's called camouflage
>>30081166
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzle_camouflage
>>30081076
Reminder that this didn't happen except in the case of the Laconia.
>>30080965
The bongs weren't the brightest when it came to warfare.
>>30081204
this happened untill laconia, when the germans stopped doing it. they were trying to get survivors off bismarck too. but there it was the subs who chased away the RN who would have picked up many survivors otherwise
>>30080773
a largely academic point, if her crew did manage to scuttle her they simply hastened the end of a ship already sinking. they also managed it within minutes of several torpedo strikes.
before torpedos hit and she sank (or was scuttled for the krauts among us) she was already crippled, burning and starting to go down
>>30080858
honestly not really, the brits were mad at the time because the Hood was a big ship and had been used as a tourboat/showpiece for a while, but that same use had put a already flawed battlecruiser rather behind on her refits.
so the british lost 1 over aged battlecruiser that would have been out of action for 18+ months with a refit anyway had she not engaged bismarck, and being honest suffered no net loss of naval capacity as a result of the action, the germans lost one of the only 2 heavy surface units they had that wasnt decisively inferior to the RNs heavy units
RIP in pieces.
>>30080789
kek
>>30081116
kinda like the look of the nelsons, and the KGV werent actually bad looking ships,
they also were better warships than bismarck
>>30081235
>w-we didnt like it anyways
but yeah, theres a reason it was ordered to not engage in any surface combat whatsoever, no matter what surface combatants it met, it wouldnt be worth it
>>30081251
nah m8 they are objectively the ugliest battleships of the war. and bismarck beat the PoW in an engagement, so i dont know how thats any worse.
RN needed stringbags and a zerg to finish it
>>30081279
but PoW suffered no significant damage in its engagement with bismarck, and inflicted enough damage to bismarck to send her running for home.
and in the following engagement the bismarck was beaten by KGV.
>>30081261
>w-we didnt like it anyways
well at the time the british were pissed as fuck, retrospect says that the Hoods military value was limited and that the exchange was favourable to the british, at the time the symbolic loss was far more significant.
then the brits were furious, now meh a worthwhile exchange
>>30081325
PoW ran home for repairs, and was lucky that the shell resting beside the boilers didnt go off.
bismarck was attacked three times after denamrk strait. first by stringbags, second by destroyers, and thrid by KGV, Rodney and 3 cruisers. I wouldnt give bismarcks defeat to KGV by any means, if anything its the crew of ark royal that got it.
>>30081349
PoW was ordered to break off because the RN had no reason to risk a 1 v 1.5 battle once the Hood went down. It was fully capable of carrying on.
>>30081349
PoW needed repairs its true, prinicpally to its guns, it wasnt battle damage though, PoW had been rushed out of the shipyards and still had civilian yard workers in its turrets trying to get them working properly (hadnt even had a shakedown cruise yet) its forward turrets had mechanical trouble so she broke off
but the bismarck didnt cause the damage, the shell by the boilers had a faulty fuse and would have been set off by the water if it hadnt, it certainly wouldnt have penetrated had it been working properly
>>30081165
we all know that 2200 is less than 6 gorillion
2200 europeans killed for the jew
The eternal anglo never rests
>>30080955
>gets hit in the magazine
>explodes
>it was scuttled
>>30081389
I guess that's why it was leaking fuel and oil from his by the Bismarck
>>30081716
You know what other battleship was leaking fuel? Hint, it was the Bismarck.
>>30081716
>>30081729
bismarck was hit forward of the belt, and caused contamination of fuel, it was also it below the belt, and the shell flooded a boiler room, and they had to flood some other shit to balance the ship. this lowered it's speed to 28 knots, and limited its range. PoW also fucked up the captains motor launch
PoW was hit alot in the superstructure, fucking up directors, and a plane. she was hit a couple of times aft, was hit by a dud from bismarck below the belt, this lowered PoWs speed to 26 knots.
PoW ran away because of gun failure, damage and superior force.
Bismarck ran away due to damage limiting range and speed, and orders
>>30081064
>Most powerful battleship
>Sunk by outdated biplanes
>muh Aryan supremacy German engineering
>>30081729
And yet the 'undamaged' PoW that was fully capable of carrying on disengaged first.
>>30082120
>The hood
>pride of the English fleet
>Sunk in one hit by the Bismarck
>>30082393
Still sunk by stringbag biplanes kek. Maybe huns are worse than vatniks after all.
>>30082417
Bismarck was technically immobilized when the biplane swept in.
Its like shooting someone in an electric wheelchair with one wheel with a musket.
>>30082504
No it wasn't at all. The biplanes were what rekt it's rudders.
>>30080767
failed state boat
>>30080767
I used to work at the plant here in SC that operates the gi-fucking-gantic lathe the Krauts used to turn her guns. They sank it near the end of the war but the allies dredged it up again.
>>30082504
>Its like shooting someone in an electric wheelchair with one wheel with a musket
now I want to see that
>>30082393
>>pride of the English fleet
Only to dumbass civilians who didn't know shit about shit and though that the longest and prettiest ship they had = the best. Thank the media for that. The RN knew that battlecruisers were outdated and shit but they had to work with what they had and couldn't resist having their battlecruisers fight the exact kind of ships they shouldn't fight.
>outgun anything that can catch it, outrun anything that can outgun it
Except by WW2 actual fast battleships were a thing, so the Hood was even more of a relic than the QE-class ships, which should have been, and probably were by those in the know, considered the 'best' in and pride of the RN at the time.
it's okay they were expendable yurotrash krauts.
Rip In Pieces
>>30081211
yeah like we never ruled the waves faggot
>>30083044
>probably were by those in the know, considered the 'best' in and pride of the RN at the time.
KGVs are probably the most underrated ships of the war. The guns had teething problems and were a bit underpowered but they had a very good armour scheme and were pound-for-pound exceptional ships. Duke of York claims possibly the best long-range hit of the war at North Cape, hitting Scharnhorst at 26,000 yards in an arctic blizzard and very rough seas
>>30080965
kek
>>30080767
Not enough
>>30080767
>taking 2200 lives with her.
but the important thing is the ship's cat survived.
>>30080773
Shelled into a sinking condition.
>>30080773
Scuttling is still a form of sinking. You don't say "he didn't die, he committed suicide."
>>30086563
Didn't need to be scuttled. The Bismarck was already sinking condition from damage in the final encounter. The RN could have just left the area and the Bismarck would have gone down soon after.
>>30081070
>>30081073
>what is HMS Victory
>what is HMS Warrior
>what is HMS Belfast
>>30081076
Germans did the exact same thing in WWI. A Zeppelin bombed and drove off the British destroyers attempting to rescue survivors from the SMS Blucher.
>>30082393
The Hood was the "pride of the British fleet" BECAUSE battlecruisers are only good for propaganda and will blow up if you look at them funny.
>>30082504
See >>3008254
The Bismarck had taken on some water during the Battle of Denmark Strait, but it was the loss of the rudder due to the biplane attack that really did her in.
>>30086633
And I'm just saying EVEN IF she wasn't damaged at all, scuttling would still be a form of sinking.
>>30086856
Should be
See >>30082540
Skidmarck
>Bismarck, Tirptiz, Yamato and Roma are all sitting at the bottom instead of in museums
Fucking faggot usn why did we have to sink them all. Iowa is nice to visit but give me some fucking variety
>>30088630
USN sank only one of the boats you listed.
>>30080985 <---- here you go
>>30088630
Because no one fucks with the U.S.A.
Here's a present
https://youtu.be/VH9mnV_NMng
>>30088630
because the right side won world war two you autistic faggot
if those yellow bellied faggot goons wanted their battleships intact they should of never taken them out of port
>>30088840
>right side
You mean the left
>>30088630
Fuck your kraut ships.
>>30080844
That's Battle of the River Plate to you mister
or was the the Graf Spee?
>>30088867
>>30088840
>>30088768
>>30088747
>Not having an appreciation for weapons regardless of their origins
I expected too much from this chest beating shitheap of a board
>>30081076
Yeah, and?
Total war is total war.
>>30088902
well ofcourse they would make good muesuems, sheeit there isnt one piece of world war 2 military hardware of that size and scope that wouldnt kick ass as a muesuem
but my point stands
faggot
>>30080767
how much would the steel be worth for scrap if someone could salvage her?
>>30081702
>>30080965
he was making fun of the autists claiming the Bismarck was scuttled
>>30081116
idk man. the late era configurationsalways made me think of Star Destoyers, I guess that monolitic superstructure really does it, esp with the Nelsons and for some reason, the old QE class too.
>>30081716
You lost.
Get over it.
>>30081794
>Bismarck ran away
That's what I took away from this
>>30085774
That camo is actually pretty good
>>30081161
Neat
>>30088902
Then don't fucking blame the USN.
USN BBs are much nicer to look at anyways.
>>30081082
Why would they keep the Eugen when the Americans had almost 20 of their own, superior Baltimores in service?
>>30086755
That's till a pitiful 3 over the entire history of the Royal Navy.
The Yanks kept like 40+ museum ships from WW2 alone. I've been to a dozen or so and they are quite neat.
>>30089126
Railgun armed BB-Ns when?
>>30080767
It was a tragic boating incident.
>>30080767
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
All krauts and naziboos belong in a hole or at the bottom of the ocean.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KecIdlEAKhU
>Sink the Bismark
>>30080767
Best battleship of her time.
Good girl.
>>30091554
So good that it was sunk
>>30088957
Tipitz was scrapped by some norwegian junker.
I think that company still exists, and the plates to cover the holes while doing road construction in norway, are armor plates from tirpitz
>>30089050
bismarck didnt chase, and continued its mission of braking out into the atlantic.
>>30091634
Except it didn't. It was mission killed and was headed to France for repairs.
>>30090939
sexiness, and it had superior FCS to almost anything of similar size, USN wrote a detailed report on the analysis of the ship, its a good read.
>>30091634
no. Just no.
It got sea water in its fuel so it could make it, that's why it had to turn for French occupied ports.
People are posting in this thread who haven't even bothered to read at least Wikipedia.
>>30091639
heading to france would have stopped the mission but would still be part success, it would have broken out into the atlantic and be a huge threat.
>>30091662
Your point? Mine was that you were wrong and the Bismarck was not continuing on with its mission as your uninformed mind believes.
>>30091558
Well, nothing is invincible.
So what is your point?
>>30091683
lutjens could have gone north or east back to norway, he decided to go to brest so the mission could continue on a later date. Rheinübung was not just about sinking merhcants, but also getting bismarck out of the north sea.
but yeah I should have phrased myself differently. my orignial point was that the bismarck didnt "run away from a fight with hood"
Lütjens mistake was that the didn't expect how much energy and material the Royal Navy would invest into sinking the Bismarck.
At this point it was the largest fleet assigned to a single operation just against a single ship.
>>30091738
his biggest mistake was all those fucking radio messages.
>>30091747
I contend his biggest mistake was not prepping the Arabian Bull prior to departure. See we know that Germans are cuckolds and must prep the bull on the hour, stemming from their defeat of WWI and their acceptance and inclusion of Ottoman Roaches into their midst.
>>30091738
Can't fight a fleet if the other guys don't have more than single ships to throw at you >>30091747
Bismarck wasn't tracked by radio intercepts.
>>30091764
didnt the RN loose track of bismarck after or just before prinz eugen and bismarck split, I'm almost sure they regained track and confirmed it was heading for brest thanks to radio intercepts
>>30091791
They miscalculated based on radio. Bismarck was spotted by an American Catalina.
>>30091764
>>30091791
looking it up the RN lost contact with bismarck after prinz eugen had broken off, at 0400 on the 25th, they regianed contact thanks to long radiotransmissions.
furthermore, the radio transmission to bismarck, switched from wilhelmshaven to a station in france, confirming that bismarck did not head back to norway
>>30091641
I've read it, and the conclusion is what they had on the baltimores was better.
The Germans did things their own way because their radar wasn't good enough to pick up shell splashes from 8 inch guns, the Americans didn't have that problem.
>>30088840
>right side
>world is decending in into degeneracy
Sure bud.
>>30080767
Rest in peices you filthy jerrys
[spoiler] seriously jks RIP [/spoiler]
>>30091938
>Baltimore
>first ship put in service in 1943
>>30092068
For an outdated stringbag they sure had decent looks. The long ol' torp slung underneath doesn't hurt either.
>>30092359
Exactly, the US has dozens of newer and better ships, with th even newer Des Moines coming into service.
Zero reason to keep Prinz Eugen for anything other than testing and experimentation.
>>30091938
You didn't read the report.
The report stated that the Prinz Eugen fulfilled all requirements of a heavy cruiser in service of the US Navy.
They were even impressed by her hydrophones
>>30082393
>20 year old vessel put up a fight with a newer ship
>bismark still btfo by biplanes
>>30081229
Not true, the British knew there were no u-boats nearby from ultra intercepts, they were just butt hurt over the Hood so they steamed off after pulling a few token survivors from the water. There were no subs within 24 hours range. They pulled the same thing with the Scharnhorst, the Brits are very vindictive when it comes to war.
>>30092068
That guy saluting though
Honestly the best thing to do with the Bismarck is to let him sit down there and remain a war grave. It's far enough down that it won't suffer the indignity of being illegally scrapped like Repulse and Prince of Wales or the Jutland trio. Hell people have dived down into Repulse and disturbed human remains just for the hell of it, at least the remains on Bismarck like in the hangar are out of most people's reach.
>>30082120
It was not sunk.
The torpedoes hit the decks that would be above water.
It was scuffled by its crew.
>>30086563
And still it would mean it was not in your power to actually kill "him"
I don't know why being sunk takes anything away from the Bismarck, which was an excellent battleship.
>>30093569
It was a good boat for WW1.
>>30093446
That wasn't really claimed. This is all in response to the OP referring to the Bismarck sinking.
>>30094109
Still, the Bismark was not sunk. It was scuffled.
Like Hitler was not killed but commented suicide.
>>30094143
Hitler was killed though. Haven't you ever heard it phrased like "he killed himself"?
>>30092935
Not quite.
Her propulsion system was considered an unreliable nightmare by the USN.
>>30086755
None of those are HMS Warspite
Lol at the fucking Wehraboos in this thread.
>i-i-i-it was scuttled guys so the brits lose really, never mind it was uncontrollable, had no functioning turrets or fire control directors, was on fire from stem to stern, and could not have made port in her condition.
>>30094143
>Still, the Bismark was not sunk. It was scuffled.
Doesn't matter. The RN had destroyed her. She couldn't move, she couldn't fight, there was no help coming, the whole fucking thing's a bonfire, and the RN was sitting all around pounding away. That the crew sank her on their own before the RN could have the pleasure simply meant that the corpse stopped twitching a bit quicker.
So, yeah, she was sunk. If you shoot someone a few times and then light them up with a flame thrower it's your kill, even if the guy manages to fall off a cliff.
>>30090939
Mostly we didn't want the Russians to have her.
IIRC we paid them a bit of cash instead and they still weren't happy. Fuck 'em
>>30096581
bismark was defeated pretty quickly in that battle, but it was testimony to how incredibly resilient the ship was. and that the armor scheme itself wasnt as shit as many people claim, thats all there is to the "he was scuttled" argument, apart from pride, basically that kgv and rodney ran out of ammo and fuel before they could sink it.
the argument has its meaning when discussing the qualities of the design
>>30094143
So if you pull the plug on a vegetable that happens to be burning alive and is also bleeding out due to a ruptured stomach, then they didn't die? Glad to know, anon.
>the royal navy was great you guys!
>that's why they never conducted another offensive operation of merit afterwards despite the KM having zero surface vessels
kuk
>>30096741
its more like trying to murder a guy by shooting him, but the fucker keeps standing. you know like muh samurai movies.
taking a long time to die = honor
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZTWCwqmgLc
not like the shamefur dispray that hood showed.
naval people is pretty anal about these things
>>30096762
what was there to operate against?
admitedly they got rekt early in the pacific, but the americans handled that.
>>30096619
More that that, the Brits and Americans also claimed the Italian Littorios over Russian objections.
Then scrapped both of them for <1 million each.
>>30096724
I'm sorry, but just because she had not taken on enough water to slip beneath the waves after Rodney and King George V broke off does not mean the design had merit.
Her design kept her vitals within the citadel safe (though she still had critical components outside the citadel that could severely impact her ability to fight if hit), but her armor belt did not extend high enough to prevent easy penetration at longer ranges through her belt, nor did it extend low enough to protect against underwater hits. This means that it takes less hits to severely compromise her stability, which is a huge flaw for a ship that would be fighting in the North Atlantic.
>>30091621
You buy a knife made out of the steel from Tirpitz
>>30098603
>underwater hits
Wait, wait. This is/was a thing? Did anyone train and/or design the shells for this?
>>30098603
Actually the Bismarck class as a whole had remarkably good stability as designed, in fact the Germans actually overdid it a little bit and in rough seas it may have affected the effectiveness of the armament as the ship was somewhat 'stiff' in it's rolling characteristics.
The belt armor was a bit of a compromise, the Germans had already tried to save weight with extensive welding of the structure and the class was already well over the weight of a treaty legal battleship. Whether some of this armor structure is simply weight savings or simply holdovers in the design from the Bayern and Baden is unknown.
It is known that the welded structure did suffer from some defects and failures as some welds were reported to give way during the initial engagement with Prince of Wales and Hood. Welding was a very new process at the time and the 'Wotan Weich' and 'Wotan Harte' materials were even more picky than usual, some evidence of this can be seen in the debris field of the vessel as some of the structure in the stern area shows clear signs of failed welds.
Honestly though the Bismarck was doomed from the minute he took a hit to the stern from a Swordfish. Steering gear damage is serious on any warship and Bismarck and indeed the entirety of the German naval units of that era had rather fragile stern structures (Prinz Eugen and Lutzow suffered stern collapses as well) It didn't help that extremely fortunate shell hits early in the battle crippled the Bismarck's gun directors and by an early point in the battle it was firing largely blind. If you look into the order of battle that day within an hour of the opening salvos both KGV and Rodney were at nearly point blank range firing directly into the superstructure and upper hull of Bismarck, well within the zone of immunity and causing massive damage to the upperworks.
Not a single ship of the war could survive that sort of punishment for long, at one point both KGV and Rodney were within 3700 meters of Bismarck.
>>30100281
The Japanese did, apparently they fuzed their shells with extremely long timers so they could travel underwater and be effective in that role.
>>30096016
It is legitimately sad that ship does not exist anymore.
>>30100283
>Actually the Bismarck class as a whole had remarkably good stability as designed
Reading comprehension:
>it takes less hits to severely compromise her stability
With typical sea conditions in the North Atlantic, any holed area on the Bismarck's side would begin taking on water. Her armored belt did not extend high enough provide sufficient protection to her upper hull, nor did it extend low enough to protect areas of the hull that could be hit by an underwater penetration or brought out of the water by the ship's heeling motion. This means a much larger portion of her side was perforable even by heavy cruisers simply because her belt did not cover areas that every other navy in the world thought important to cover. In addition, due to the very low position of her armored deck in the ship, perforations in the upper hull of the ship would cause flooding above said armored deck and reduce her reserve buoyancy by an entire deck, leading to those stability issues I mentioned above.
>Honestly though the Bismarck was doomed from the minute he took a hit to the stern from a Swordfish
Bismarck was doomed the moment PoW scored shots on her fuel bunkers under her armored belt. If the RN didn't get her and she somehow made it to France, her fate would have been the same as the Tirpitz. Target practice for the RAF.
>If you look into the order of battle that day within an hour of the opening salvos both KGV and Rodney were at nearly point blank range firing directly into the superstructure and upper hull of Bismarck, well within the zone of immunity and causing massive damage to the upperworks.
The range they opened fire determined the accuracy of their guns. Both of them could penetrate and lay waste to Bismarck's turrets and superstructure at any range they could realistically hit her from, and both could penetrate her hull from ranges in excess of those they opened fire at due to Bismarck's lackluster belt coverage and downright retarded deck armor layout.
>>30100317
The loss of HMS Warspite really is a big thing, that ship had seen damn near everything one warship could see in it's career.
The ship that really made me sad when I learned about it and it's demise is HMS Implacable, it started life as the Duguay-Trouin and fought in the Battle of Trafalgar. It was captured shortly after and served in British service for the next 40 years. The ship survived all through the 19th Century, World War I and World War II and it's final fate was in 1949 the Royal Navy hauled HMS Implacable out to sea and sank it with an explosive charge.
>>30100485
Yeah. It partly stems from the financial situation but there really was zero sentimentality in Britain post WW2. My dad was a child when there was still rationing and normal people generally didn't give a shit about things like that they just kept an eye on their quality of life.
>>30096741
>totally missing the point
Are britbongs really this retarded?
>>30100444
>This means a much larger portion of her side was perforable even by heavy cruisers simply because her belt did not cover areas that every other navy in the world thought important to cover
heavy cruisers cannot perforate the 145mm upper belt, much less that and the bulkhead behind it, this uppe rbelt went up to the upper deck contrary to other designs were the upper decks were completely unarmored.
furthermore a hole above the waterline does not compromise a whole deck of buoyancy.
the thinner upper belt would decap and fuse the shells so the wouldnt penetrate the armored deck.
and arguing that the armor scheme protected only the vitals can be said about every battleship ever. kgv or iowas superstructure would get rekt by anything bigger than 5 inch too.
KGVs belt wast uniform in thickness either, tapering to 140mm at the bottom, bismarck had similar tapering some distance below the main belt, not as deep as KGV. though, 140mm would protect kgv from high caliber underwater hits except at long range.
>Bismarck was doomed the moment PoW scored shots on her fuel bunkers under her armored belt.
>under her armored belt
this is where you are completely wrong.
PoW did NOT score hits against any fuel bunkers below the belt. this was in the prow of the ship, above the waterline, but below the bow wave. the underwater hit by PoW caused flooding in a electrical room, due to splinters penetrating the bulkhead, it also blew the flame out of a boiler.
the thing about bismarcks armor is that you can penetrate the belt without entering the vital area. thats excactly what kept it afloat.
the horizontal protection isnt as bad as you seem to think, its slightly worse than contemporary british ships. it was incredibly effective against bomsbs shown by tirpitz taking shitloads of hits by AP bombs.
>>30091621
The generator from Tirpitz was used to provide power to the town of Honningsvåg. The power station is still there.
>>30096724
>and that the armor scheme itself wasnt as shit as many people claim
But it was. The whole point of armor is to keep a ship in the fight. The Bismarck's armor failed to do so. Now, the quality of the armor itself you can argue was very good, but the placement of the armor - ie, the armor scheme - was poor, because it failed to protect Bismarck's vital systems from damage which ultimately crippled the ship.
>>30102982
bismarcks vital system was protected just as much as any other battleship there was, arguably better than the british counterparts, which didnt have armored cons like germany and the united states.
>>30102982
>>30103138
I also want to point out that the bismarck had a theoretical immune zone against british guns from 0 to 25000ish meters. compared to the british 20000-30000ish IZ on rodneys and KGVs.
I also want to mention that IZ doesnt mena undefeatable, but it will prevent penetrations into the citadel. which is considered the vitals
>>30103138
>>30103170
Bismarck's electronics and hydraulic lines were outside the armor. Which is they were all cut almost immediately in the engagement, leading to the loss of her turrets.
>>30103294
I've never seen a source for this., the communication lines from the directors went to the computers, down below the armored deck through armored shafts. bismarck was first hit in the top mast director, was still shooting, then in her front director and guns, fore turrets stopped shooting for a while, then lastly it was hit in the rear director. the turrets then continued firing locally from the directors inside the turrets.
the last shot from the 38cm was fired 29 minutes after bismarck was first hit in the foremast
>>30080767
RIP. It must have been hell on earth on there. The survivor accounts are fascinating.
>>30080767
Were sad about the Bismark now? Wasnt that a Nazi battleship? The "Guns as big as steers, and shells as big as trees" one?
>>30103398
everyone and everything beaten to a pulp by chavs deserves a little mourning
>>30091747
This.
>>30091844
No, radio told them where it was heading.
>>30093933
Well memed
>>30103372
It's an old myth which still get used as argument because the shitty combinedfleet website still claims it.
>>30103443
True enough, she was a marvel, just on the wrong side.
>>30096800
The RN was utter shit in WWI and WWII.
>>30103498
imagine iowa, bismarck and vanguard wrecking commies, that would be a sight to behold
>>30102982
Just stop arguing with this retard.
>>30103517
I would go back in a time machine to serve on the Bismarck, throw lutjens overboard, and save it.
>>30085661
Fail Britannia,
Britannia don't rule shit.
A bunch of pussy-ass wankers
Afraid of knives.
>>30103495
Makes me wonder why anyone would get the idea that the Germans put hydralic pumps and pipes outside of the turrent.
It totally doesn't make sense. There is nothing to gain.
>>30082393
STERN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>30081648
underrated comment
