Hi,
okay, i think your answer is worth a reply.
First, if your first passion is airwar and second naval warfare, it's the other way with me, naval warfar is my passion, and brought me to airsims, because actually there aren't any worthy naval sims around...at least online.
I know warships1.com well, and think you are right, it's one of the only sources I would quote, but it only shows stats.
And I don't like stats, because numbers show nothing, only the overview about all numbers could say a bit...but still not everything.
All other stats are...uhm...funny.
Comparing armor for example...if you really think the thickness shows everything you are totally wrong.
You have also to compare the special type of steel used for it.
Talking bout japanese ships, the steel used for japanese ships was/is known to be a low quality steel, which had not the same abillity to withstand penetrations like (for exampel) US or German steel.
That decreased with the war for german steel due to lack of resources. But we're comparing stats.
So the thinner belt armor of the Bismarck class was made out of better steel than the thicker belt of the Yamato. What does it say?
Only one thing, that stats won't work all the time, and you can't compare the plain thickness because of different material.
So, which armor was better? I dunno, please don't tell me you know.
:-)
One the other hand you are somewhat right, when you say the Bismarck class had flaws, yes it had. But to say KGV was the overall better ship is BS.
And just ignoring quotes of people who fought that ship is a little ignorant, I don't quote a politican, are some marketing guy, I quote the man who basically chased, fought and sunk her.
If you really believe some internet source has deeper insight than Adm. Tovey, go ahead.
At least he didn't shared your opinion about KGV vs. Bismarck. I would have to look what he said exactly, and it would be prolly anyway a bit wrong, for I don't have the quote in english, but it was basically, that he said, he won't think about what had happened if the KGV met Bismarck in her full operational state, and not wrecked.
Please give a quote of a person with different point of view and higher reputation in naval stuff and I will think again about my point of view. But plain stats, and internet hobbyproject are not interesting for me.
Btw, where the hell you found information about Bismarck class being overweighted?
It correct that german guns were overweighted, which was a big problem for all german ships, exspecially for the later destroyers.
But the ships self were not.
Only because the official first plan shows a different number than later was measured doesn't mean the plans didn't change.
Why you think Tirpitz had a higher draught than Bismarck? Simply because the put on more weight and that pushed the hull deeper into the water?
Please read some information from a german shipyard.
On the other hand, I could also allege that KGV made her mile also with little weight, so she must been also slower fitted out for war, right?
You can say much about german ingeneers, but not that the german habbit of bureaucracy did forget some information.
The mile was taken in full war state, and not in some special event to impress somebody.
And something about my own point of view, I don't say the Bismarck class was the ubership so many see it in them. It was some kind of a racing horse, with great abillities, and some dangeous flaws (the light protected powersupply of the main turrets for example) while the KGV (to stick to that comparison) was imho some kind of a working horse.
KGV was the better choose for the RN, Bismarck for the KM, because both ships were planed to fullfill different duties.
