Why attack the Tirpitz?

[Rino]

I faithfully disagree. Every source I have read has said that daue to the Tirpitzs double armour on the top, regular bombs were ineffective. Hence the tallboy

     Amazingly enough, the Tirpitz's sister ship was sunk without tall boys.  The "double
armor" didn't save the Bismarck, so I guess we agree to disagree.

[The Grinch]

     Amazingly enough, the Tirpitz's sister ship was sunk without tall boys.  The "double
armor" didn't save the Bismarck, so I guess we agree to disagree.

A torpedo did hit the rudder/steering mechanism that forced Bismark to go in a big circle. When she did, the Germans soon started to give her up, and the allied forces moved closer in to finish her.

[B3YT]

they were not identical in their armour design either. the Tirpits had a diffrent armour design to the bizmark.   

[Angus]

The Bismarck was not "tied" into a steep circle as many think, but restricted she was. Anyway, she faced HMS Rodney which beat her to the first hit, penetrating the fire control quarters. (Take it with a grain of salt, I am running on my memory here). Bismarck was hit hundreds of time from various vessels of the RN, ending up as hopeless. I have not seen any source of the Bismarck hitting anything back by the way.
Although well armoured, the Bismarck and Tirpitz were nothing undestroyable. By the way, HMS Prince of Wales did score on the Bismarck. The shells were smaller than of the 15 inch gun (Bismarck, HMS Hood, Warspite etc), "only" 1.500 lbs or so, but enough.
Tirpitz did get bombed before, but the eggs were not heavy enough....

[Scotty55OEFVet]

Her mere presence was enough to be a threat to the Allies and tying up significan naval forces.


ack-ack

 
Agreed Ack-Ack...the sinking of the Tirpitz was a huge blow to the Kriegsmarine.  And also as Bruv said, it was at a time when England and the rest of the free world could breath a sigh of relief.  It was a Morale victory at a time when they were few and very far between. 

[Bubbajj]

One of my military history professors once said that the Bismarck wasn't destroyed by the British but, in fact, was scuttled by the crew after the wrecked steering gear made fighting back a losing proposition in any event. If this info is true (he claimed he had a source that was "there") she wasn't sunk by any bombs or torpedos.

[GtoRA2]

The Bismark BBs were not very good.

Check out this page for an interesting comparison.

  http://www.combinedfleet.com/baddest.htm

The North Carolina and Alabama class BBs from the US Navy would have easily bested her. The Iowas would have dominated.

I think the whole Navy other then Uboats where a huge waste of time and resources for the Germans.  Think of all the tanks the steel from those two wasted junk wagons could have built.

[The Grinch]

One of my military history professors once said that the Bismarck wasn't destroyed by the British but, in fact, was scuttled by the crew after the wrecked steering gear made fighting back a losing proposition in any event. If this info is true (he claimed he had a source that was "there") she wasn't sunk by any bombs or torpedos.

  I have also heard that, but only from a old man for many years ago. But now i have heard 3 ways of this story.
Angus,yours and mine story

[macleod01]

One of my military history professors once said that the Bismarck wasn't destroyed by the British but, in fact, was scuttled by the crew after the wrecked steering gear made fighting back a losing proposition in any event. If this info is true (he claimed he had a source that was "there") she wasn't sunk by any bombs or torpedos.

I've heard that story a few times as well, but as far as I remember there is no proof that it it happened.

RINO: I agree to Disagree, but if you feel like stateing your sources, you may yet convince me. I'm very open minded and I realise that I am not a History professor with a degree in either WW2 or the Sinking of The Tirpitz and the Bismark. 

As for my sources, I saw one source that mentioned as you said correctly that one bomb once penetrated from a Barracuda. All the other sources I looked at stated that normal bombs were ineffective hence the need for the Tallboy.

[Nemisis]

Folks,

I was looking through the info at the "Allied and Luftwaffe wrecksites in Norway" thread Grinch posted. I noticed all the RAF aircraft lost attacking the Tirpitz. Why was the RAF so keen to sink her (and take those losses)? She wasn't going anywhere was she? And the RAF kept such close watch on her, she couldn't have raised steam without setting off alarms. Seems like a waste of lives going after her.

63tb

Well first off, she was one of two Bismark class battle ships. She and the Bismark were the pride of the german navy, so it was a morale blow to the germans. Second, but not less important, she and the Bismark posed a major threat to allied shipping, and the convoy escorts, although the Bismark was sunk on her maiden voyage. The allies couldn't send a couple of battleships out with every convoy, so Tirpitz had to be destoyed. The sole purpose of the raid on St. Nazaire was to destroy the only dry dock on the french coast large enough to service her.

[Serenity]

Well first off, she was one of two Bismark class battle ships. She and the Bismark were the pride of the german navy, so it was a morale blow to the germans. Second, but not less important, she and the Bismark posed a major threat to allied shipping, and the convoy escorts, although the Bismark was sunk on her maiden voyage. The allies couldn't send a couple of battleships out with every convoy, so Tirpitz had to be destoyed. The sole purpose of the raid on St. Nazaire was to destroy the only dry dock on the french coast large enough to service her.

I was always under the impression St. Nazaire was a target due to the U-Boat pens, unless you are talking about a single, particularly eventful raid which I think I am remembering but am embarrassingly unsure about.

[macleod01]

I was always under the impression St. Nazaire was a target due to the U-Boat pens, unless you are talking about a single, particularly eventful raid which I think I am remembering but am embarrassingly unsure about.

I believe you are both right. St Naziere was made famous for her U-Boat pens, hence the major raids of which I believe were multiple.
However I also believe that Commando's were sent in to destroy the dry docks at one point because, as pointed out, it was the only dry dock on the Atlantic coast big enough to take the Tirpitz. With this dock gone, or out of action, it meant that the Tirpitz had to go back to Germany to resupply and refit.

[Serenity]

I believe you are both right. St Naziere was made famous for her U-Boat pens, hence the major raids of which I believe were multiple.
However I also believe that Commando's were sent in to destroy the dry docks at one point because, as pointed out, it was the only dry dock on the Atlantic coast big enough to take the Tirpitz. With this dock gone, or out of action, it meant that the Tirpitz had to go back to Germany to resupply and refit.

Ah yes, thank you Macleod, I was remembering right on that raid as well. Thats the one where the British commandos penetrated on a destroyer marked up to look German, correct?

[macleod01]

Ah yes, thank you Macleod, I was remembering right on that raid as well. Thats the one where the British commandos penetrated on a destroyer marked up to look German, correct?

Far as my memory serves, yes.

[Nemisis]

Ah yes, thank you Macleod, I was remembering right on that raid as well. Thats the one where the British commandos penetrated on a destroyer marked up to look German, correct?

The HMS Campbeltown, the USS Buchanan which they got through the lend-lease act. Yes, was painted in german colors, flying the german flag and naval ensign, and I believe the bridge and superstructure had the outlines changed with sheet metal.

They crashed it into the dry dock, and planted timed charges in the ship. I don't know what the raiders did, but I do know that when the the timed charges went off as the germans were searching the ship.