Author Topic: Beautiful Sisters  (Read 4945 times)

Offline 63tb

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 152
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #30 on: October 03, 2013, 03:18:57 PM »

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #31 on: October 03, 2013, 03:27:34 PM »
The British pounded the Biskmarck for two hours and were unable to sink her with gunfire. Unlike almost all other battleships the Bismarck-class' engineering section and magazines also have extensive protection from plunging fire. Firing AP shells both Bismarck and Iowa have almost the same range due to the Bismarck's guns' greater muzzle velocity (22.1 miles vs. 23.64 miles). However the Iowa has no real protection from plunging fire, and Bismarck can also penetrate Iowa's main belt at close range.

"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Arlo

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24759
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #32 on: October 03, 2013, 03:38:40 PM »

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #33 on: October 03, 2013, 03:49:57 PM »
Yeah, I saw it the first time. It says the Bismarck and Iowa are very close in firepower 9 vs 10. In armor I have no idea of how they've arrived at that conclusion. If they've only looked at external armor then I would agree with it, but unlike Iowa, the Bismarck had several "layers" of protection. Once you got through the Iowa's armor or deck plating there is nothing stopping the shell from getting into the engineering spaces and magazines, just like what happened to the Hood.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline mthrockmor

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2649
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #34 on: October 03, 2013, 03:52:32 PM »
Penetrating the armor to destroy engineering is one thing. Removing all lightly armored items from the top-deck is another. I have not been on a battleship though I have spent a fair amount of time on a Baltimore/Oregon City Class Heavy Cruiser. Minus the heavy armor the rest of that ship is designed to stop bullets, not shells. Enough 5" shells will turn these ships into smolder wrecks. If the bridge took one hit it would be gone. The fire direction units have no ability to withstand that type of damage.

As I said, 6-10 hits from either ship would leave the target a mess. Maybe nothing penetrated the magazines, the rest of the ship is done for.

It is all about who hits the first and the most.

Boo
No poor dumb bastard wins a war by dying for his country, he wins by making the other poor, dumb, bastard die for his.
George "Blood n Guts" Patton

Offline Arlo

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24759
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #35 on: October 03, 2013, 03:58:10 PM »
Yeah, I saw it the first time. It says the Bismarck and Iowa are very close in firepower 9 vs 10. In armor I have no idea of how they've arrived at that conclusion. If they've only looked at external armor then I would agree with it, but unlike Iowa, the Bismarck had several "layers" of protection. Once you got through the Iowa's armor or deck plating there is nothing stopping the shell from getting into the engineering spaces and magazines, just like what happened to the Hood.

There was a details link covering that (you may have missed). This is what it lead to:

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

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #36 on: October 03, 2013, 04:11:32 PM »
Penetrating the armor to destroy engineering is one thing. Removing all lightly armored items from the top-deck is another. I have not been on a battleship though I have spent a fair amount of time on a Baltimore/Oregon City Class Heavy Cruiser. Minus the heavy armor the rest of that ship is designed to stop bullets, not shells. Enough 5" shells will turn these ships into smolder wrecks. If the bridge took one hit it would be gone. The fire direction units have no ability to withstand that type of damage.

As I said, 6-10 hits from either ship would leave the target a mess. Maybe nothing penetrated the magazines, the rest of the ship is done for.

It is all about who hits the first and the most.

Boo

Yes, both the Iowa and The Bismarck could, given time, destroy each other's superstructures and turrets.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #37 on: October 03, 2013, 04:14:31 PM »
There was a details link covering that (you may have missed). This is what it lead to:

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


Yeah, I read that and the even more detailed link after that.

"I quantified their total vulnerability zone range (using the Navy Ballistic Limit as the benchmark for penetration). For instance, Bismarck could put a shell through her own belt from any range under 29,000 yards (the weakest score), whereas she would have to close to within 16,400 yards to punch through Iowa's"

He only considered the main belt thickness as I suspected, not the layered internal armor scheme of the Bismarck.

"Next, I arbitrarily said, OK, Iowa has the best rating, so she gets a '10', and Bismarck has the worst (by a ton), so she gets, ummmm, a '5'. Why a '5'? Well, why not?"

Why should I listen to this man?
« Last Edit: October 03, 2013, 04:16:51 PM by GScholz »
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Arlo

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24759
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #38 on: October 03, 2013, 05:05:48 PM »
Yeah, I read that and the even more detailed link after that.

"I quantified their total vulnerability zone range (using the Navy Ballistic Limit as the benchmark for penetration). For instance, Bismarck could put a shell through her own belt from any range under 29,000 yards (the weakest score), whereas she would have to close to within 16,400 yards to punch through Iowa's"

He only considered the main belt thickness as I suspected, not the layered internal armor scheme of the Bismarck.

"Next, I arbitrarily said, OK, Iowa has the best rating, so she gets a '10', and Bismarck has the worst (by a ton), so she gets, ummmm, a '5'. Why a '5'? Well, why not?"

Why should I listen to this man?

You don't have to listen to anyone. You can just keep insisting that the Bismark was equal to if not better than the Iowa and Yamato.




Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #39 on: October 03, 2013, 05:19:42 PM »
Or I could listen to someone who knows what he's talking about, like Nathan Okun, who ironically was listed as one of the sources by that "baddest" guy. Incidentally he also contributes to the same site.

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

"Using the 1.67 caliber nose shape with the body weight and diameter of the 38 cm Psgr. L/4,4 projectile without its AP cap, I plotted the striking velocity needed for complete penetration of a 4.33" Wh plate (assumed to be similar to U.S. Navy WWII STS plates against which my test data was compiled) versus obliquity from 45o to 68o. On the same graph I then used my face-hardened armor penetration computer program to plot the remaining velocity and the impact obliquity on the 4.33" plate - which equals the 68o backward plate slope minus the projectile's downward exit angle after penetrating the side armor - for the 38 cm projectile after it hits the 12.6" belt (plus backing) at a Target Angle of 90o (only angle of fall affects obliquity). The two curves gradually converged but never met, indicating that the sloped deck was impenetrable to the German 38 cm projectile at all ranges, as designed.

Similar computations with British 14-16" projectiles concerning hitting the sloped 4.33" deck after going through the 12.6" belt gave identical results. Even the 18.1" (46 cm) guns on the IJN YAMATO would have had to be placed directly against the side armor of the BISMARCK to have even a chance of penetrating that sloped deck. The German designers had done a very good job in this one protection area!

Note that the 4.33" plate extends only slightly above the ship's waterline at normal draft, so a close-range, almost horizontal shot has to hit very near to or below the waterline to hit the sloped part of the deck, even if penetration were possible. If the ship is partially flooded and has a higher waterline, then only underwater hits an the belt could hit this sloped deck, with all other hits ricocheting off of the flat center deck area or passing above the deck and hitting the far side of the ship if the fuze did not detonate the projectile first. On top of this, it is difficult to get a projectile to penetrate the surface of the water at such shallow impact angles, even with Japanese-style diving shells, so underwater hits at these ranges would be very rare. Needless to say on top of all that, if you can get close enough to get any side/deck penetrations with a big-enough gun, the target that you are firing at is already "kaput" and such penetrations are of no consequence anyway!

My computations also indicate that, as expected, the 3.15-3.74" horizontal portions of the lower armored deck could not be penetrated under any conditions after penetrating the 12.6" side belt by any projectile used on any actual warship.

FINAL CONCLUSION: The BISMARCK's internal vitals could not be directly reached through the side belt armor under any normal circumstances due to the sloped "turtle-back" armored deck design, making its design the best of all given in this article for this purpose."
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #40 on: October 03, 2013, 05:34:45 PM »
"The BISMARCK gets "the low end of the stick" in these outer belt armor comparisons against any foreign battleship of its era! However, we are not done with analyzing the side protection, because there is more waterline armor to many of these ships than their outer belt."

This is what that other guy, and most people in general, gets wrong.



He continues:

"The YAMATO had no internal armor behind the main belt except for a 1.97" (50 mm) Copper Non-Cemented (CNC) (a low-nickel-alloy steel meeting the NVNC specifications only in thin plates) circular bulkhead enclosing the lower portions of the main turret barbettes on the inside."

"The internal protection of the SOUTH DAKOTA and KING GEORGE V was not much greater than the YAMATO..."

"The RICHELIEU had an internal 1.97" (50 mm) homogeneous Krupp steel armor plate behind the main belt that was inclined inboard (bottom closer to the outer hull than the top) at 40.5o from the vertical. This plate met the bottom edge of the main belt and had a 1.57" (40 mm) flat "protective deck" portion at its upper edge extending across the middle of the ship at just above the waterline, very much like the main armor deck of the BISMARCK, but thinner."

"The BISMARCK had a system like the RICHELIEU protecting its lower hull (engine rooms, boilers, and magazines), but here it was 4.33" (110 mm) of Wh armor sloped at 68o from the vertical from just above the waterline to the bottom edge of the main belt - the vitals were thus protected by the equivalent of the frontal armor of a post-WWII heavy tank behind the 12.6" KC n/A belt! This thickness of plating at that slope would cause any pieces of belt armor or any badly broken projectile to glance off into the upper hull region."
« Last Edit: October 03, 2013, 05:46:30 PM by GScholz »
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline mthrockmor

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2649
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #41 on: October 03, 2013, 06:57:34 PM »
Yes, both the Iowa and The Bismarck could, given time, destroy each other's superstructures and turrets.

Which ends the fight. This is how the Royal Navy ended the Bismarck, destroying its ability to fight without sinking it. Torpedos did that. Several fights in the Pacific ended after the enemy destroyed key command elements on the ship. One of the fights in "the Slot" of Guadalcanal involved US Destroyers hitting a battleship with so many 5" shells the battleship was effectively destroyed, though the heavy armor had not been penetrated a bit.

Boo
No poor dumb bastard wins a war by dying for his country, he wins by making the other poor, dumb, bastard die for his.
George "Blood n Guts" Patton

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #42 on: October 04, 2013, 04:36:04 AM »
Indeed, which is why I think Iowa vs Bismarck 1-on-1 would most likely result in both ships limping back to port after sustaining severe damage and high casualties.

The general idea most people have about Bismarck and Hood is that Bismarck opened fire and scored a lucky hit on Hood and that's it... People often overlook that during the Battle of the Denmark Strait, Bismarck wasn't facing off against only the Hood, but also against the Prince of Wales, a King George V class battleship, the most modern British battleships used during WWII (she was in fact younger than Bismarck). The British ships opened fire first, and scored the first hit: a 14" shell from Prince of Wales hit Bismarck's bow. Prince of Wales would hit Bismarck two more times before the battle was over.

Also Bismarck did not hit Hood just once, and it was not the first hit that blew her up. Hood was first hit on the boat deck, starting a fire and setting off some ammunition, but this was not fatal and did not spread. A probable second hit on Hood damaged her bridge and radar systems. The third, and fatal hit to Hood's aft magazine didn't happen until eight minutes after the British had opened fire.

Bismarck then turned her guns on the Prince of Wales. She was hit four times by Bismarck and three times by Prinz Eugen, seriously damaging her superstructure and fire command systems, and holing her hull below her armor belt. Captain Leach wisely laid down smoke and withdrew when he realized he could no longer realistically hope to further damage Bismarck. Also Prinz Eugen was closing to torpedo range and Leach feared he would lose his ship for nothing.

In the space of 10 minutes Bismarck (firing 93 shells from her main armament), aided by Prinz Eugen, had sunk the Hood and rendered the King George V class battleship Prince of Wales combat ineffective. Bismarck herself had only suffered minor damage, but her loss of fuel and two knots reduced speed would later contribute to her demise. Admiral Lütjens let Prince of Wales escape despite staunch, and repeated protests from Captain Lindemann. This may have been a mistake by Lütjens, but he had strict orders not to engage the RN if he could avoid it.

As for Bismarck's final battle...  Firing while turning was not something the mechanical computers and fire control system of that time could handle very well. Being unmaneuverable Bismarck had little or no chance to hit with her main armament as she was wandering aimlessly through the battle, though she managed to straddle the enemy ships a couple of times. The British pounded her for two hours with battleships and cruisers, firing 2,800 shells scoring more than 400 hits, and torpedoed her twice before she finally succumbed to the sea. Some even claim the Germans had to scuttle her.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2013, 05:20:19 AM by GScholz »
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23046
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #43 on: October 04, 2013, 07:47:25 AM »
Prince of Wales entered that fight combat ineffective.  She still had about 100 ship builders on her and had not completed her trials.  During the fight eight of her ten 14" guns went out of action due to electrical faults that had nothing to do with damage caused by the Germans.  While I agree that Bismark was superior to the KG5 class, that was hardly a fair example of what to expect from a sustained engagement between a combat effective Bismark and a combat effective KG5.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Re: Beautiful Sisters
« Reply #44 on: October 04, 2013, 07:59:35 AM »
She did have the largest ship in the RN fighting alongside her... And they were shelling Bismarck and Prinz Eugen for five minutes before the Germans returned fire. Bismarck was equally untested in battle and her crew was very inexperienced. It was, after all, her maiden voyage.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."