Bismark outclassed Hood in every category, as the former was a modern battleship facing a WW1 era adversary. It was never a fair fight from the beginning.
"Bismar(c)k outclassed Hood in every category" Hood main armament = 8 x 15" guns Bismarck main armament= 8 x 15" guns Bismarck belt armour = 12.6 inches Hood belt armour = 12 inches (Though angled so as to give 13 inches of protection). Bismarck armoured deck = 3.75 inches Hood armoured deck = 3 inches Hood top speed = 30 knots Bismarck Top Speed = 30 knots
There is another creator who covered this with witness accounts and some thereory crafting believed that the shell that did the Hood in was a shell that fell about 10-15 feet short of the ship with extremely good or bad luck a wave trough exposing more of the side of the ship allowing the shell to strike the ship under her main armour belt and remain intact exploding in the machine shop area which happened to be next to the 4in magazine compartment. Which cause the 4in ammo to start exploding causing the gout of flame seen by her main mast. When enough of the 4in ammo had cooked off and no where else to go it blew out the bulkhead that lead to the 15in magazine and within micro seconds of the 15in magazine cooking off well 1400+ sailors can tell you how that ended.
20:16 This sailor was the one who last saw Holland alive. According to him, he looked back & saw Holland sitting & made no attempt to escape. He just sat there watching in the distance. Ted jumped into the freezing sea soon after
As Ted Briggs was leaving the bridge amidst the chaos & disintegration of the ship, he mentioned how as he reached the door, the Squadron Navigator, Commander John Warrand, smiled and selflessly moved aside and gestured for him to leave first.
@ it would have helped Bismarck get to a French port. The Swordfish would have been blown out of the sky by BF109’s. But I agree with you, the British Navy was far more superior (radar-strategy-courage).
@@bgjb-r1499 perhaps, but it, just like Bismarck, would have been quite the tempting target, and would’ve been hunted down all the same, eventually. They would have needed several carriers and a fleet to defend them if they would even hope to not have them be hunted every single day, and they didn’t have the motivation nor the time to do that.
Germany had started building a carrier the Graf Zeppelin in 1936 and could have been completed in 1940 but the invasion of Norway delayed it's completion and it was never finished before the end of the war.
It would appear that the British ships had a better position on the Bismarck but failed to hit the target. Salvo after salvo missed their targets. Was that an indication that the British ships were "Tired Iron" or that the crew was poorly trained. Either way. The Brits had more than ample opportunity to strike a blow to the Bismarck.
How do you assess that the British had "the better position" ? V/Adm Holland had been on course to achieve the classic "crossing of the T" on Lütjens which would have seen him facing off with ALL his main armaments able to bear on the German ships, unfortunately 6 hours before the engagement the British heavy cruisers shadowing Bismarck and PE lost contact with them for nearly 90 minutes throwing the whole of Holland's plotted intercept into doubt. He was forced to turn from a WSW interception course to a NNW course to close more quickly on the estimated position of the German ships to reduce the possibility of them changing course and evading. The German ships DID then change course slightly to starboard, which meant that come the final interception at 5:30am on the 24th May Lütjens, who had absolutely NO idea of the approach of Hood & PoW, had inadvertantly managed to turn the tables and had now crossed V/Adm Holland's "T", meaning that the German ships could bring ALL their guns to bear on the British, while in return the British had effectively lost nearly 50% of their return firepower. The situation also resulted in the British ships sailing directly into a prevailing westernly sea with sea spray reaching as high as their bridges, causing a degree of sighting problems for the British rangefinders while the Germans with the sea behind their backs weren't so hindered. Inspite of the situation the British found themselves in, they DID "strike a blow to the Bismarck"... three in fact, one of which stopped the whole of "Exercise Rhine" in its tracks and forced Adm Lütjens to cancel his mission and abort to Brest in Northern France.
I would have thought the everyone would/should have learned the battle cruiser lesson at Jutland. It's the the speed, nor armour that makes a difference, it's the shell size. Three knots will not outrun a 14-16" shell. The RN pretty much got the battle cruiser thing rolling with 12" guns, but I don't care how fast or what armor the Scharnhorst or Gneisenau had, 11" guns are too light. Not for cargo ships but King George V battleships, and there is your test. I'm glad the USN turned their battle cruisers into the carriers Lexington and Saratoga. The RN turned some into carriers as well, albeit with just some plain bad luck. But there was Hood, Repulse....
A Battlecruiser is not suppose to fight Battleships!! They are meant to Raid smaller ships and Transport Convoys. Because if there big guns they could stand a chance against BBs but its not their main target.
while the most powerful warship of the Kreigsmarine, Bismarck wasn't the most powerful ever. The British , id argue, had the 2 v2 advantage with Prince of Wales, especially. And to be fair, Hood wasn't exactly designed to take on a full scale battleship
Many inaccuracies in this narration, mainly the top speeds of the British ships. Hood did have a top speed of 32 knots but, that was before her recent refit to increase her belt armor. She was also scheduled to receive deck armor and have her aft reworked due to splash over. The increased weight of the armor would have made her sit lower in the water and decreased her speed. Estimates put her top speed at 30.3 knots. Prince of Wales top speed was the same as the other KGV ships at 28 knots. That is the whole reason Holland was trying to cut them off. If Bismarck(top speed 30.8 knots) and Prinz Eugen(top speed 32 knots) make the open Atlantic, the British didn't have anything that could catch them. Second, the first landed shot in the battle was Prinz Eugen hitting Hood. Third, Norfolk and Suffolk were in a trailing position, not parallel. Once shots were fired, they both went to flank speed to join the battle but, didn't make gun range until PoW was in full retreat. Also, there is no mention of the four destroyers that accompanied Hood and PoW, the ones that Holland dispatched southwest because Suffolk had lost contact.
"The first shot landed in the battle was Prinz Eugen on Hood". Wrong. The first shot landed was from HMS Prince of Wales' sixth salvo at Bismarck, which hit one of the Bismarck's boats near to her funnel, at this point in the engagement NEITHER of the German ships had yet opened fire.
@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 I'm not disputing who shot first. All I'm saying is according to the surviving logs of the battle, Prinz Eugen's hit on Hood's mainmast was the first confirmed (acknowledged from both sides) hit of the battle. PoW may have hit Bismarck under the waterline just before. However, the straddled salvoes were reported as misses aboard PoW.
You said Hood is a battle cruiser but said Scharnhorst/Gneisenau are battleship. Actually Scharnhorst/Gneisenau are battle cruisers. You are intentionally misinformation.
The Germans classed both Scharnhorst & Gneisenau as "Sclachtshiff" or "battleships". Though due to their speed and medium calibre main armaments the British referred to them as "battlecruisers".
@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 There was debate in the Kriegsmarine whether to go with the triple 11" turrets or the twin 15" like Bismarck. After their run in with HMS Renown, Gneisenau was supposed to get the 15" refit.
You are the one misinformed. Classification largely depends on hull design. Ships need to be wider (increased displacement) to counter the added armor weight. Hood was long, slender and fast but, not well armored. The Scharnhorst class were more classic battleship design. They had a lower length to width ratio than Hood with considerably newer diesel turbine engines. Were they on the small side for battleships? Yes, but, they were well armored and proved to be the most successful pair of battleships in WWII.
Play CALL OF WAR for FREE on PC or Mobile:
💥 callofwar.onelink.me/q5L6/TWL001
Receive a Unique Starter Pack, only available for the next 30 days!
Great video of the engagement, gripping, detailed and with a clear narration.
The bow wave trough theory would have at least been worth a mention.
Bismark outclassed Hood in every category, as the former was a modern battleship facing a WW1 era adversary. It was never a fair fight from the beginning.
there is not such thing as a fair battle in war.
there was also Prince of Wales...
Same as the Kirishima ( WW1 battle cruiser ) fought against South Dakota and Washington ( new WW2 battleship ).
"Bismar(c)k outclassed Hood in every category"
Hood main armament = 8 x 15" guns
Bismarck main armament= 8 x 15" guns
Bismarck belt armour = 12.6 inches
Hood belt armour = 12 inches (Though angled so as to give 13 inches of protection).
Bismarck armoured deck = 3.75 inches
Hood armoured deck = 3 inches
Hood top speed = 30 knots
Bismarck Top Speed = 30 knots
@@jebbroham1776 that's not true at all. Bismarck just got a lucky shot that I doubt they could have gotten again if they tried
There is another creator who covered this with witness accounts and some thereory crafting believed that the shell that did the Hood in was a shell that fell about 10-15 feet short of the ship with extremely good or bad luck a wave trough exposing more of the side of the ship allowing the shell to strike the ship under her main armour belt and remain intact exploding in the machine shop area which happened to be next to the 4in magazine compartment. Which cause the 4in ammo to start exploding causing the gout of flame seen by her main mast. When enough of the 4in ammo had cooked off and no where else to go it blew out the bulkhead that lead to the 15in magazine and within micro seconds of the 15in magazine cooking off well 1400+ sailors can tell you how that ended.
20:16 This sailor was the one who last saw Holland alive. According to him, he looked back & saw Holland sitting & made no attempt to escape. He just sat there watching in the distance. Ted jumped into the freezing sea soon after
As Ted Briggs was leaving the bridge amidst the chaos & disintegration of the ship, he mentioned how as he reached the door, the Squadron Navigator, Commander John Warrand, smiled and selflessly moved aside and gestured for him to leave first.
Without a carrier the German Navy was at a profound disadvantage.
@@bgjb-r1499 either way, the Germans couldn’t hope to compete with the Royal Navy, so one carrier wouldn’t have helped much.
@ it would have helped Bismarck get to a French port. The Swordfish would have been blown out of the sky by BF109’s. But I agree with you, the British Navy was far more superior (radar-strategy-courage).
@@bgjb-r1499 perhaps, but it, just like Bismarck, would have been quite the tempting target, and would’ve been hunted down all the same, eventually. They would have needed several carriers and a fleet to defend them if they would even hope to not have them be hunted every single day, and they didn’t have the motivation nor the time to do that.
Germany had started building a carrier the Graf Zeppelin in 1936 and could have been completed in 1940 but the invasion of Norway delayed it's completion and it was never finished before the end of the war.
@@bgjb-r1499 The Graf Zeppelin was to be equipped with BF109s and Stuka's which would have annihilated the British fleet without land air cover.
It would appear that the British ships had a better position on the Bismarck but failed to hit the target.
Salvo after salvo missed their targets. Was that an indication that the British ships were "Tired Iron" or
that the crew was poorly trained. Either way. The Brits had more than ample opportunity to strike a blow
to the Bismarck.
How do you assess that the British had "the better position" ?
V/Adm Holland had been on course to achieve the classic "crossing of the T" on Lütjens which would have seen him facing off with ALL his main armaments able to bear on the German ships, unfortunately 6 hours before the engagement the British heavy cruisers shadowing Bismarck and PE lost contact with them for nearly 90 minutes throwing the whole of Holland's plotted intercept into doubt. He was forced to turn from a WSW interception course to a NNW course to close more quickly on the estimated position of the German ships to reduce the possibility of them changing course and evading. The German ships DID then change course slightly to starboard, which meant that come the final interception at 5:30am on the 24th May Lütjens, who had absolutely NO idea of the approach of Hood & PoW, had inadvertantly managed to turn the tables and had now crossed V/Adm Holland's "T", meaning that the German ships could bring ALL their guns to bear on the British, while in return the British had effectively lost nearly 50% of their return firepower.
The situation also resulted in the British ships sailing directly into a prevailing westernly sea with sea spray reaching as high as their bridges, causing a degree of sighting problems for the British rangefinders while the Germans with the sea behind their backs weren't so hindered.
Inspite of the situation the British found themselves in, they DID "strike a blow to the Bismarck"... three in fact, one of which stopped the whole of "Exercise Rhine" in its tracks and forced Adm Lütjens to cancel his mission and abort to Brest in Northern France.
The loss of the three battle cruisers at Jutland was due to incorrect powder storage and had nothing to do with the loss of the Hood.
I would have thought the everyone would/should have learned the battle cruiser lesson at Jutland. It's the the speed, nor armour that makes a difference, it's the shell size. Three knots will not outrun a 14-16" shell. The RN pretty much got the battle cruiser thing rolling with 12" guns, but I don't care how fast or what armor the Scharnhorst or Gneisenau had, 11" guns are too light. Not for cargo ships but King George V battleships, and there is your test. I'm glad the USN turned their battle cruisers into the carriers Lexington and Saratoga. The RN turned some into carriers as well, albeit with just some plain bad luck. But there was Hood, Repulse....
@@briankorbelik2873 British arrogance trumps experience every time.
@@DavVT04 What "arrogance" exactly?
A Battlecruiser is not suppose to fight Battleships!! They are meant to Raid smaller ships and Transport Convoys. Because if there big guns they could stand a chance against BBs but its not their main target.
@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 On everything.
@@joeysausage3437 Ah, so complete BS then, that's just what I expected.
Bismarck was 251 meters long
while the most powerful warship of the Kreigsmarine, Bismarck wasn't the most powerful ever. The British , id argue, had the 2 v2 advantage with Prince of Wales, especially. And to be fair, Hood wasn't exactly designed to take on a full scale battleship
Many inaccuracies in this narration, mainly the top speeds of the British ships. Hood did have a top speed of 32 knots but, that was before her recent refit to increase her belt armor. She was also scheduled to receive deck armor and have her aft reworked due to splash over. The increased weight of the armor would have made her sit lower in the water and decreased her speed. Estimates put her top speed at 30.3 knots. Prince of Wales top speed was the same as the other KGV ships at 28 knots. That is the whole reason Holland was trying to cut them off. If Bismarck(top speed 30.8 knots) and Prinz Eugen(top speed 32 knots) make the open Atlantic, the British didn't have anything that could catch them. Second, the first landed shot in the battle was Prinz Eugen hitting Hood. Third, Norfolk and Suffolk were in a trailing position, not parallel. Once shots were fired, they both went to flank speed to join the battle but, didn't make gun range until PoW was in full retreat. Also, there is no mention of the four destroyers that accompanied Hood and PoW, the ones that Holland dispatched southwest because Suffolk had lost contact.
"The first shot landed in the battle was Prinz Eugen on Hood". Wrong.
The first shot landed was from HMS Prince of Wales' sixth salvo at Bismarck, which hit one of the Bismarck's boats near to her funnel, at this point in the engagement NEITHER of the German ships had yet opened fire.
@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 check he official records. Prinz Eugen started firing before Lutjens order.
@@darin271 HMS Hood & Prince of Wales BOTH opened fire before either of the German ships, loosing off several salvoes before the Germans responded.
@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 I'm not disputing who shot first. All I'm saying is according to the surviving logs of the battle, Prinz Eugen's hit on Hood's mainmast was the first confirmed (acknowledged from both sides) hit of the battle. PoW may have hit Bismarck under the waterline just before. However, the straddled salvoes were reported as misses aboard PoW.
A good Video of this Battle!
here is a what if scenario for you What if the Right after sinking the hms hood, surrended to the usa?
You said Hood is a battle cruiser but said Scharnhorst/Gneisenau are battleship.
Actually Scharnhorst/Gneisenau are battle cruisers.
You are intentionally misinformation.
The Germans classed both Scharnhorst & Gneisenau as "Sclachtshiff" or "battleships". Though due to their speed and medium calibre main armaments the British referred to them as "battlecruisers".
They were counted as Battleships. Did you mean the Deutschland Class which where Pocket Battleships?
Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were battleships in terms of armour, but had small calibres for battleships of the WW2 era.
@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684 There was debate in the Kriegsmarine whether to go with the triple 11" turrets or the twin 15" like Bismarck. After their run in with HMS Renown, Gneisenau was supposed to get the 15" refit.
You are the one misinformed. Classification largely depends on hull design. Ships need to be wider (increased displacement) to counter the added armor weight. Hood was long, slender and fast but, not well armored. The Scharnhorst class were more classic battleship design. They had a lower length to width ratio than Hood with considerably newer diesel turbine engines. Were they on the small side for battleships? Yes, but, they were well armored and proved to be the most successful pair of battleships in WWII.
20 years of engeneering between the two ships. Look at the different tanks or aircraft of WWI and WWII.
Twenty years in time... but not necessarily in technology.