GrandMoffTano

Ship Tree Speculation

Just now, arczer25 said:

history says that they tried and tried to sink Bismarck but finally Bismarck crew self-destruct ship.

We sunk the Bismark, the crew never at any point tried to scuttle her.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

Really? Cause history seems to say otherwise.

german 28s on the Scharnhorst were comparable to the 15" guns... nuff said

4 minutes ago, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

We sunk the Bismark, the crew never at any point tried to scuttle her.

you wish... even Wikipedia agrees with us here

Fate:
  • Scuttled following incapacitating battle damage, 27 May 1941 in the North Atlantic

 

The CREW SCUTTLED it... Camerons expedition found no evidence that it sunk through the hits... the only reason the damage done by the RN was severe because of the amount of hits... but there was NO Cirtical damage BELOW the waterline..

Edited by RohmMohc
  • Upvote 4
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

We sunk the Bismark, the crew never at any point tried to scuttle her.

This suggests that Bismarck's compartments were flooded when the ship sank, supporting the scuttling theory.[143] Ballard added "we found a hull that appears whole and relatively undamaged by the descent and impact". They concluded that the direct cause of sinking was scuttling: sabotage of engine-room valves by her crew, as claimed by German survivors

 

UK guns have low performance for WW2 era.

 

King Gregory V 14inch (WW2 era):

9144m = 396mm

13716m = 335mm

New Mexico 14inch (inter war era)

9144m = 511mm

13716m = 426mm

 

most powerful British 16inch/45 for Lion class battleships.

18288m = 389mm

22860m = 335mm

Colorado 16inch/45 (inter war era)

18288m = 412mm

22860m = 349mm

 

weakness of UK BB armament is one of reasons why they didn't appeared in WoWs, they lack high tier ships.

Edited by arczer25
  • Upvote 3
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bismark was sunk by Swordfish bombers and RN ships, she wasn't scuttled at all.

 

And the BL14" gun was better than the BL15" gun.

2 minutes ago, arczer25 said:

weakness of UK BB armament is one of reasons why they didn't appeared in WoWs, they lack high tier ships.

British tech tree in that game is being released and does not lack high tier ships.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

Bismark was sunk by Swordfish bombers and RN ships, she wasn't scuttled at all.

more made combat ineffective.

4 minutes ago, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

And the BL14" gun was better than the BL15" gun.

worse, only reason why King Gregore V got 14" were Treaty restrictions it had proposed 15inch

Hood 15inch (WW2 era):

9144m = 422mm

13716m = 353mm

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, arczer25 said:

more made combat ineffective.

worse, only reason why King Gregore V got 14" were Treaty restrictions it had proposed 15inch

Hood 15inch (WW2 era):

9144m = 422mm

13716m = 353mm

kgv armament had nothing to do with restrictions and what they lack in penetration they have in knock out power. And no we sunk the Bismark. No scuttled about it.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

Bismark was sunk by Swordfish bombers and RN ships, she wasn't scuttled at all.

the only thing the swordfish did (that was important) was to cripple the rudder... the RN ships than played the 1812 overture on it... crew scuttled it.. and when it was scuttled it was hit over 400 times by big calibre shells...

 

Quote

First Officer Hans Oels ordered the men below decks to abandon ship; he instructed the engine room crews to open the ship's watertight doors and prepare scuttling charges.[123] Gerhard Junack, the chief engineering officer, ordered his men to set the demolition charges with a 9-minute fuse but the intercom system broke down and he sent a messenger to confirm the order to scuttle the ship. The messenger never returned and Junack primed the charges and ordered the crew to abandon the ship.[124] Junack and his comrades heard the demolition charges detonate as they made their way up through the various levels.[125] Oels rushed throughout the ship, ordering men to abandon their posts. After he reached the deck a huge explosion killed him and about a hundred others.[126]

 

The four British ships fired more than 2,800 shells at Bismarck, and scored more than 400 hits, but were unable to sink Bismarck by gunfire. At around 10:20, running low on fuel, Tovey ordered the cruiser Dorsetshire to sink Bismarck with torpedoes and sent his battleships back to port.[127]Dorsetshire fired a pair of torpedoes into Bismarck's starboard side, one of which hit. Dorsetshire then moved around to her port side and fired another torpedo, which also hit. By the time these torpedo attacks took place, the ship was already listing so badly that the deck was partly awash.[125] It appears that the final torpedo may have detonated against Bismarck's port side superstructure, which was by then already underwater.[65] Around 10:35, Bismarck capsized to port and slowly sank by the stern, disappearing from the surface at 10:40.[128] Some survivors reported they saw Captain Lindemann standing at attention at the stem of the ship as she sank.[129]

 

Junack, who had abandoned ship by the time it capsized, observed no underwater damage to the ship's starboard side.[124] Von Müllenheim-Rechberg reported the same but assumed that the port side, which was then under water, had been more significantly damaged.[129] Around 400 men were now in the water;[124]Dorsetshire and the destroyer Maori moved in and lowered ropes to pull the survivors aboard. At 11:40, Dorsetshire's captain ordered the rescue effort abandoned after lookouts spotted what they thought was a U-boat. Dorsetshire had rescued 85 men and Maori had picked up 25 by the time they left the scene.[130] A U-boat later reached the survivors and found three men, and a German trawler rescued another two. One of the men picked up by the British died of his wounds the following day. Out of a crew of over 2,200 men, only 114 survived.[128]

so... 400 BB hits YET THEY STILLW ERENT ABLE TO SINK THE BISMARCK

 

Quote

Ballard's survey found no underwater penetrations of the ship's fully armoured citadel. Eight holes were found in the hull, one on the starboard side and seven on the port side, all above the waterline. One of the holes is in the deck, on the bow's starboard side. The angle and shape indicates the shell that created the hole was fired from Bismarck's port side and struck the starboard anchor chain. The anchor chain has disappeared down this hole.[138] Six holes are amidships, three shell fragments pierced the upper splinter belt, and one made a hole in the main armour belt.[139] Further aft a huge hole is visible, parallel to the aircraft catapult, on the deck. The submersibles recorded no sign of a shell penetration through the main or side armour here, and it is likely that the shell penetrated the deck armour only.[140] Huge dents showed that many of the 14 inch shells fired by King George V bounced off the German belt armour.[141]

 

Ballard noted that he found no evidence of the internal implosions that occur when a hull that is not fully flooded sinks. The surrounding water, which has much greater pressure than the air in the hull, would crush the ship. Instead, Ballard points out that the hull is in relatively good condition; he states simply that "Bismarck did not implode."[142] This suggests that Bismarck's compartments were flooded when the ship sank, supporting the scuttling theory.[143] Ballard added "we found a hull that appears whole and relatively undamaged by the descent and impact". They concluded that the direct cause of sinking was scuttling: sabotage of engine-room valves by her crew, as claimed by German survivors.[144] Ballard kept the wreck's exact location a secret to prevent other divers from taking artefacts from the ship, a practice he considered a form of grave robbing.[136]

 

The whole stern had broken away; as it was not near the main wreckage and has not yet been found, it can be assumed this did not occur on impact with the sea floor. The missing section came away roughly where the torpedo had hit, raising questions of possible structural failure.[145] The stern area had also received several hits, increasing the torpedo damage. This, coupled with the fact the ship sank "stern first" and had no structural support to hold it in place, suggests the stern detached at the surface. In 1942 Prinz Eugen was also torpedoed in the stern, which collapsed. This prompted a strengthening of the stern structures on all German capital ships.[144]

 

Edited by RohmMohc
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

kgv armament had nothing to do with restrictions and what they lack in penetration they have in knock out power.

 

"During 1935 the Director of Naval Construction produced several design studies showing various alternatives for what became the King George V class battleships.  One of these, designated 15C, was for a design with nine 15"/45 (38.1 cm) guns in three triple turrets.  This design was considered to be one of the best proposals for these ships, but Treaty restrictions prevented the use of guns larger than 14" (35.6 cm).  For this reason, work on designs with 15 and 16 inch (38.1 and 40.6 cm) guns was discontinued and only 14 inch (35.6 cm) designs were pursued. "

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

Bismark was sunk, not scuttled.

Bismarck was scuttled, not sunk. How about you bring up some evidence outside of british WWII beliefs of "WE SUNK THE BISMARCK"

  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

his was supported by survivors' reports in Pursuit: the Sinking of the Bismarck, by Ludovic Kennedy, 1974 and by a later examination of the wreck itself by Dr. Robert Ballard in 1989. A later, more advanced examination found torpedoes had penetrated the second deck, normally always above water and only possible on an already sinking ship, thus further supporting that scuttling had made the final torpedoing redundant.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a discussion on how the trees should be structured or who sunk the Bismarck? Its starting to get a bit off topic.

  • Upvote 4
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BigHits said:

I don't see any problem

AA strength, fired mass per minute.

Vittorio Veneto 4454kg/min

Iowa 22222kg/min

Yamato 8973kg/min

Richelieu 12517kg/min

King George V 16144kg/min

Bismarck 9378kg/min

 

Allen M. Sumner class destroyer 4733kg/min

 

 

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RohmMohc said:

Bismarck was scuttled, not sunk. How about you bring up some evidence outside of british WWII beliefs of "WE SUNK THE BISMARCK"

That's because we did sink the Bismark.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

That's because we did sink the Bismark.

If you guys are going to continue this can you please do so in pms or another thread?

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mercedes4321 said:

If you guys are going to continue this can you please do so in pms or another thread?

wait i'm gonna make a thread

 

11 minutes ago, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

That's because we did sink the Bismark.

nope... you shot at it until it wasnt combat worthy anymore... than the crew scuttled it

 

 

Edited by RohmMohc
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RohmMohc said:

wait i'm gonna make a thread

 

nope... you shot at it until it wasnt combat worthy anymore... than the crew scuttled it

No we sunk the Bismark.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, arczer25 said:

AA strength, fired mass per minute.

Vittorio Veneto 4454kg/min

Iowa 22222kg/min

Yamato 8973kg/min

Richelieu 12517kg/min

King George V 16144kg/min

Bismarck 9378kg/min

 

Allen M. Sumner class destroyer 4733kg/min

 

 

 

It's 100% true that later into the war Allied ships completely outclassed Axis ships in AA.

 

But that is because Axis were not upgrading their AA through the war as much as Allies did. German surface navy became insignificant and it became pointless to upgrade them. IJN after Midway was too busy trying to rebuild carrier force to care about anything else. And Italians... let's just say they never took this war very seriously.

 

In game Axis ships would need planned upgrades that never became reality to compete at higher tiers. This is already happening with planes and tanks of all nations so it wouldn't be a problem.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

No we sunk the Bismark.

nope... in your dreams maybe...

 

you contributed NOTHING to support your claim... just "we said we did it therefore we did it!!!!"

 

Edited by RohmMohc
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RohmMohc said:

nope... in your dreams maybe...

 

you contributed NOTHING to support your claim... just "we said we did it therefore we did it!!!!"

 

In reality actually. But hey, I don't care about your Anglophobic propaganda.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Enkidu69 said:

But that is because Axis were not upgrading their AA through the war as much as Allies did. German surface navy became insignificant and it became pointless to upgrade them. IJN after Midway was too busy trying to rebuild carrier force to care about anything else. And Italians... let's just say they never took this war very seriously.

 

In game Axis ships would need planned upgrades that never became reality to compete at higher tiers. This is already happening with planes and tanks of all nations so it wouldn't be a problem.

Gerät 58 anyone?

 

tbf German battleships also were mostly (mostly but not always... especially after they were not hunting anymore in the atlantic) rather close to shore so they could (theoretically) be protected by landbased planes... unless you dont tell the Luftwaffe that you send the Tirpitz to another area...

 

Just now, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

In reality actually. But hey, I don't care about your Anglophobic propaganda.

and i dont care about your anglophile propaganda

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Enkidu69 said:

 

It's 100% true that later into the war Allied ships completely outclassed Axis ships in AA.

 

But that is because Axis were not upgrading their AA through the war as much as Allies did. German surface navy became insignificant and it became pointless to upgrade them. IJN after Midway was too busy trying to rebuild carrier force to care about anything else. And Italians... let's just say they never took this war very seriously.

 

In game Axis ships would need planned upgrades that never became reality to compete at higher tiers. This is already happening with planes and tanks of all nations so it wouldn't be a problem.

Germans had some project of new AA load-outs, with IJN are problems, they copied bofors 40mm, but there are no new loadouts with that copy, only thing ATM is increasing amount of 25mm AA (with still have low effectiveness) and swapping 128mm AA guns to new 100mm.

 

5 minutes ago, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

In reality actually. But hey, I don't care about your Anglophobic propaganda.

if truth is Anglophobic propaganda, then :D, rly if Bismarck survivors told that they scuttled the ship and Bismarck wreck tells exactly the same, then something wrong is here, yes kill clam goes to UK as they forced Bismarck crew to do that as they didn't had other option.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SqnLdrAhsokaTano said:

Err.. Sorry but you need to educate yourself on UK Warships.

Littorio battleships where superior to bismarck and Kgv in both armor and firepower. Bismarck would have better chances against the Littorio, Kgv would be literally blown up at range. The guns on the KGV could pierce littorio belt at only 3500 meters....  381/50 guns pierced 380 mm of armor at 28 km and 510 at 18 km ( could easily go trought yamato main belt at this range). Kgv stands no chance. Hilariusly the better gun ( aside the 406 mm that could do this 1000 yards further) that royal navy had to pierce littorio belt was the 381 mm of the QE class that could pierce littorio main belt at 10000 meters ( that it's a short range engagement). Littorio battleship can rival the Iowa in terms of armor and guns. The Yamato it's on her own class..... and yes bismarck was scuttled. Ballards spedition found clear signs of auto siking and he found only 3 hits on the main belt ( all of them over the waterline ). all those 3 shells where 406 mm , 2 pierced the other bounched off..... the Royal navy gunnery primarly aimed for main turrets and the citadel to do reach the best results in terms of killing the crew. The royal navy can easily say, we stopped the bismarck, and we put her KO.  But she reached the grave by herself.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, arczer25 said:

This suggests that Bismarck's compartments were flooded when the ship sank, supporting the scuttling theory.[143] Ballard added "we found a hull that appears whole and relatively undamaged by the descent and impact". They concluded that the direct cause of sinking was scuttling: sabotage of engine-room valves by her crew, as claimed by German survivors

 

UK guns have low performance for WW2 era.

 

King Gregory V 14inch (WW2 era):

9144m = 396mm

13716m = 335mm

New Mexico 14inch (inter war era)

9144m = 511mm

13716m = 426mm

 

most powerful British 16inch/45 for Lion class battleships.

18288m = 389mm

22860m = 335mm

Colorado 16inch/45 (inter war era)

18288m = 412mm

22860m = 349mm

 

weakness of UK BB armament is one of reasons why they didn't appeared in WoWs, they lack high tier ships.

by comparing

Littorio class 381/50 guns

0 meters: 814 mm

18000 meters: 510 mm ( 121 mm more than the british most powerful gun)

28000 meters: 380 mm ( basically it's the same amount of what the KGV pierce at 9 km....) 

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.