Best World war two warships? - Page 38 - Aircraft of World War II

renrich · 08-31-2009, 09:24 AM

Just finished reading a recent book about HMS Hood and the author stated that modifications of design during original construction caused her to draw 3 feet more than planned and thus decreased freeboard and later prewar modifications and remodeling cut her top speed to 29 knots. Seems that the "Mighty Hood" was badly outmoded.

Glider · 08-31-2009, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renrich

Just finished reading a recent book about HMS Hood and the author stated that modifications of design during original construction caused her to draw 3 feet more than planned and thus decreased freeboard and later prewar modifications and remodeling cut her top speed to 29 knots. Seems that the "Mighty Hood" was badly outmoded.

I think its fair to say yes and no. 29 knots is an exceptional speed for a 1918 Battleship with guns and armour to match the best battleships afloat. It was 4 knots less than she was designed for but still excellent for the time.
By 1939 she was in desperate need of a rebuild having been kept in service without a major refit since 1918 and one similar to that given to HMS Renown was planned. However as we know the refit never happened and if it would have made a difference, who knows?

PJay · 08-31-2009, 11:09 AM

Yes the 'Hood' was always very wet aft and additional armour etc made it worse.

diddyriddick · 08-31-2009, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glider

I think its fair to say yes and no. 29 knots is an exceptional speed for a 1918 Battleship with guns and armour to match the best battleships afloat. It was 4 knots less than she was designed for but still excellent for the time.
By 1939 she was in desperate need of a rebuild having been kept in service without a major refit since 1918 and one similar to that given to HMS Renown was planned. However as we know the refit never happened and if it would have made a difference, who knows?

I've never seen anybody seriously question the guns, but my understanding is that her Battlecruiser armor did her in when she faced Bismark.

trackend · 09-01-2009, 09:18 AM

It was a common failing to send BC's against BS's. Jutland the BC (Queen Mary see below) suffered the same fate as Hood. Used as they were designed against heavy cruisers they had a big advantage. although having said that HMS Hood was all that was around to take on the Bismark in that sector the POW had not even completed sea trials so was far from ready to take on Bismark.
although the Royal was the worlds largest navy at the outbreak of war its resources were very thinly spread and due to cut backs in defense spending many vessels like the Hood although upgraded still dated back to WW1

renrich · 09-01-2009, 05:23 PM

It was a tragedy that Hood was matched against Bismarck and her armor proved inadequate. An interesting point to me to ponder is comparing the fate of the British BCs, Invincible, Indefatigable, Queen Mary, Hood and the Japanese BCs which were similar to Tiger. The British BCs all blew up at once while Hiei took a lot of punishment from surface guns and aerial attack before succumbing and Kirishima was hit some 30 times by 16 inch and 5 inch shells before eventually sinking. Kirishima was engaged at relatively close range where the incoming was flat trajectory and so was Hiei during the night fight and the max size shell she was hit by was 8 inch. Perhaps that explains it.

PJay · 09-02-2009, 05:37 PM

Off Topic for WW2 ships...The 'Invincible's actually had a gap in the deck armour amidships for a gangway. OK the chance of a shell plunging exactly there were low...

iat_butcher · 10-11-2009, 08:56 PM

Hi all I’m new here but I have been reading this and was thinking about my favored ships.

Battleship- nelson, I know it is not the best but if you look at the Hood you see that it sunk because it rushed in to the Bismarck and only could use it front turrets. An also only front turret means you have a smaller side to be hit on.

Aircraft carrier- Shinano, it may not have had the best crew but it was the first real super carrier.

Heavy cruiser- panzerswift (is a pocket battleship I know) was considered a cruiser.

Light cruiser- kuma class, especially kitakami in the early days. It had 40 torpedo tubes. Made in 1920 and was active in the night raids (it is the ship I love the most of all ships.

Destroyer- shimikaza, it had good guns and torpedo’s.

Frigate- the germane snell boot. 2 torpedo launchers 2 turrets.

I’m surprised that no one spoke about the kitakami, It rock’s!! (for me it does because it is a transport ship)

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 10-12-2009, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iat_butcher

Heavy cruiser- panzerswift (is a pocket battleship I know) was considered a cruiser.

Which Panzerschiff are you referring to?

Light cruiser- kuma class, especially kitakami in the early days. It had 40 torpedo tubes. Made in 1920 and was active in the night raids (it is the ship I love the most of all ships.

You had the Deutschland Class (Deutschland (later called theLützow), Admiral Scheer, and Admiral Graf Spee), and you had the heavy cruiser class Admiral Hipper (Admiral Hipper, Blücher, Prinz Eugen and Seydlitz)

Quote:

Originally Posted by iat_butcher

Frigate- the germane snell boot. 2 torpedo launchers 2 turrets.

Are you referring to the E-Boot? I only ask because you use the term schnell boot. They were torpedo boats such as the the PT Boats and not frigates.

The other type of "schnell boot" was the Elbing Class, Raubtier Class, Type 1935 and Type 1937 class torpedo boats. They too however were all more like destroyers than frigates.

Glider · 10-12-2009, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iat_butcher

Hi all I’m new here but I have been reading this and was thinking about my favored ships.

Battleship- nelson, I know it is not the best but if you look at the Hood you see that it sunk because it rushed in to the Bismarck and only could use it front turrets. An also only front turret means you have a smaller side to be hit on.)

A good choice for the best pre war battleship but not up to the later vessels.

Quote:

Aircraft carrier- Shinano, it may not have had the best crew but it was the first real super carrier.

Again a good choice but in the view of most comes second to the Essex, if only for their better AA.

Quote:

Heavy cruiser- panzerswift (is a pocket battleship I know) was considered a cruiser.)

Assuming that you are talking about the Pocket Battleship I would agree with you if we have to leave out AA guns.

Quote:

Light cruiser- kuma class, especially kitakami in the early days. It had 40 torpedo tubes. Made in 1920 and was active in the night raids (it is the ship I love the most of all ships.

Must dasagree totally. Too small, too fragile, too few guns and didn't achieve anything with that payload. She was if I remember correctly converted mid war to this configuration and by then the allies had a fair amount of radar which went a long way to evening up the odds.

Quote:

Destroyer- shimikaza, it had good guns and torpedo’s.

Again a good choice if you leave out AA weapons and radars but in the real world you could not and the Fletcher was a better choice.

Quote:

Frigate- the germane snell boot. 2 torpedo launchers 2 turrets.

I admit you have me there as I cannot work out what you are talking about.

timshatz · 10-12-2009, 11:01 AM

Somebody oughta PM Delc on this one. He'd be all over it.

My understanding is the Hiei's armor was upgraded to BB standards between the wars.

The three BCs that blew up at Jutland were all slugging it out with German BCs when they went bang. Not BBs. There were BBs in around but they had not yet gotten into the that fight. Well, not affecting the British BCs anyway. German BCs took down the British BCs at Jutland, not BBs. The British BCs blew because of poor ammo management and the volitility of their powerder. The Germans had had a similar problem but a fight after a BC raid on the British Coast (where the Seyditz lost a turret and almost the ship to the same problem) taught them Ammo Management ("Ordanance instructions are written in blood"). Their powder was less volitale from the start.

The Hood had been upgraded in a few spots, but not continuously. Not sure of the details, but the round that put her under seems to have been a freak shot. In the parliance of sport, the round had eyes. It went on a somewhat ecclectic route to the the secondary battery magazines. They detonated and took the mains up. Given the route it took (past or around armor plate), it entirely possible that a round from the Prince Eugen could've done it. But the Hood had just been on the receiving end of a Bismark Salvo when she blew so the odds are very good it was the Bismark that fired the shot.

Another point, the wreckage of the Hood is in such a manner that their is credible evidence that her forward magazines blew up also. The final shot, where the forward turret fired as the ship sank, could've been venting from that event instead of an actual salvo.

renrich · 10-12-2009, 04:38 PM

Actually the German BCs at Jutland had the same size guns as the German BBs, 11 and 12 inch. However the Invincible might have gotten hit by BB guns. Hiei and Kirishima as well as Haruna and Kongo were all remodeled between wars but so was Hood. In another thread I mentioned how fate seemed to step in on Queen Mary at Jutland because the other "Cats" were hit many times but were still full of fight. Actually the German BCs had their fighting qualities diminished by the damage more than the British BCs, except for the ones that blew up. Just found my reference on Jutland. Von Der Tann was hit by 4 heavy shells and all of her main battery was out of action. Derrflinger was hit by 17 heavy and 9 medium and small shells and most of her guns were out of action. Seydlitz was hit by 21 heavy and 2 medium and light shells and a torpedo and was barely afloat. Lutzow was hit by 21 heavy shells and sank. Moltke was hit by 4 heavy shells and her fighting qualities were not diminished. Lion was hit by 12 heavy shells and her q turret was destroyed but she lost no speed. Tiger was hit by 17 heavy shells and 4 medium and light shells and her fighting qualities were undiminished. Princess Royal was hit by 9 heavy shells and her fighting qualities were undiminished and New Zealand was barely scratched because, I guess, of the Maori skirt.

timshatz · 10-13-2009, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renrich

I guess, of the Maori skirt.

Ren, do you know if there are any pics out there of the Captian of the NZ wearing that skirt? Always wanted to see him the full regailia but never have.

renrich · 10-13-2009, 05:56 PM

Tim, I believe I saw a photo of him with skirt on one time but can't remember where. It may have been in Life magazine.

vikingBerserker · 10-13-2009, 06:42 PM

He wore that shirt into combat??

08-31-2009, 11:09 AM	#558
PJay Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: London UK Posts: 49	Yes the 'Hood' was always very wet aft and additional armour etc made it worse. __________________ These are my principles, if you don't like them I have others. (Groucho Marx) 'A L'Eau C'est L'Heure!' French Navy Motto

09-02-2009, 05:37 PM	#562
PJay Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: London UK Posts: 49	Off Topic for WW2 ships...The 'Invincible's actually had a gap in the deck armour amidships for a gangway. OK the chance of a shell plunging exactly there were low... __________________ These are my principles, if you don't like them I have others. (Groucho Marx) 'A L'Eau C'est L'Heure!' French Navy Motto

10-12-2009, 11:01 AM	#566
timshatz Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Phila, Pa Posts: 3,816	Somebody oughta PM Delc on this one. He'd be all over it. My understanding is the Hiei's armor was upgraded to BB standards between the wars. The three BCs that blew up at Jutland were all slugging it out with German BCs when they went bang. Not BBs. There were BBs in around but they had not yet gotten into the that fight. Well, not affecting the British BCs anyway. German BCs took down the British BCs at Jutland, not BBs. The British BCs blew because of poor ammo management and the volitility of their powerder. The Germans had had a similar problem but a fight after a BC raid on the British Coast (where the Seyditz lost a turret and almost the ship to the same problem) taught them Ammo Management ("Ordanance instructions are written in blood"). Their powder was less volitale from the start. The Hood had been upgraded in a few spots, but not continuously. Not sure of the details, but the round that put her under seems to have been a freak shot. In the parliance of sport, the round had eyes. It went on a somewhat ecclectic route to the the secondary battery magazines. They detonated and took the mains up. Given the route it took (past or around armor plate), it entirely possible that a round from the Prince Eugen could've done it. But the Hood had just been on the receiving end of a Bismark Salvo when she blew so the odds are very good it was the Bismark that fired the shot. Another point, the wreckage of the Hood is in such a manner that their is credible evidence that her forward magazines blew up also. The final shot, where the forward turret fired as the ship sank, could've been venting from that event instead of an actual salvo. Last edited by timshatz; 10-12-2009 at 04:18 PM.

10-12-2009, 04:38 PM	#567
renrich Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Montrose, Colorado Posts: 3,521	Actually the German BCs at Jutland had the same size guns as the German BBs, 11 and 12 inch. However the Invincible might have gotten hit by BB guns. Hiei and Kirishima as well as Haruna and Kongo were all remodeled between wars but so was Hood. In another thread I mentioned how fate seemed to step in on Queen Mary at Jutland because the other "Cats" were hit many times but were still full of fight. Actually the German BCs had their fighting qualities diminished by the damage more than the British BCs, except for the ones that blew up. Just found my reference on Jutland. Von Der Tann was hit by 4 heavy shells and all of her main battery was out of action. Derrflinger was hit by 17 heavy and 9 medium and small shells and most of her guns were out of action. Seydlitz was hit by 21 heavy and 2 medium and light shells and a torpedo and was barely afloat. Lutzow was hit by 21 heavy shells and sank. Moltke was hit by 4 heavy shells and her fighting qualities were not diminished. Lion was hit by 12 heavy shells and her q turret was destroyed but she lost no speed. Tiger was hit by 17 heavy shells and 4 medium and light shells and her fighting qualities were undiminished. Princess Royal was hit by 9 heavy shells and her fighting qualities were undiminished and New Zealand was barely scratched because, I guess, of the Maori skirt. Last edited by renrich; 10-12-2009 at 04:55 PM.

10-13-2009, 06:42 PM	#570
vikingBerserker Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: South Carolina Posts: 6,174	He wore that shirt into combat?? __________________ Take arrows in your forehead, but never in your back. - Samurai maxim

08-31-2009, 09:24 AM	#556
renrich Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Montrose, Colorado Posts: 3,521	Just finished reading a recent book about HMS Hood and the author stated that modifications of design during original construction caused her to draw 3 feet more than planned and thus decreased freeboard and later prewar modifications and remodeling cut her top speed to 29 knots. Seems that the "Mighty Hood" was badly outmoded.

09-01-2009, 05:23 PM	#561
renrich Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Montrose, Colorado Posts: 3,521	It was a tragedy that Hood was matched against Bismarck and her armor proved inadequate. An interesting point to me to ponder is comparing the fate of the British BCs, Invincible, Indefatigable, Queen Mary, Hood and the Japanese BCs which were similar to Tiger. The British BCs all blew up at once while Hiei took a lot of punishment from surface guns and aerial attack before succumbing and Kirishima was hit some 30 times by 16 inch and 5 inch shells before eventually sinking. Kirishima was engaged at relatively close range where the incoming was flat trajectory and so was Hiei during the night fight and the max size shell she was hit by was 8 inch. Perhaps that explains it.

10-11-2009, 08:56 PM	#563
iat_butcher Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 1	Hi all I’m new here but I have been reading this and was thinking about my favored ships. Battleship- nelson, I know it is not the best but if you look at the Hood you see that it sunk because it rushed in to the Bismarck and only could use it front turrets. An also only front turret means you have a smaller side to be hit on. Aircraft carrier- Shinano, it may not have had the best crew but it was the first real super carrier. Heavy cruiser- panzerswift (is a pocket battleship I know) was considered a cruiser. Light cruiser- kuma class, especially kitakami in the early days. It had 40 torpedo tubes. Made in 1920 and was active in the night raids (it is the ship I love the most of all ships. Destroyer- shimikaza, it had good guns and torpedo’s. Frigate- the germane snell boot. 2 torpedo launchers 2 turrets. I’m surprised that no one spoke about the kitakami, It rock’s!! (for me it does because it is a transport ship)

10-13-2009, 05:56 PM	#569
renrich Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Montrose, Colorado Posts: 3,521	Tim, I believe I saw a photo of him with skirt on one time but can't remember where. It may have been in Life magazine.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Italy v. England - Air to air	DAVIDICUS	Aviation	193	07-22-2009 11:58 AM
Air War's Greatest Aces...	lesofprimus	Stories	14	10-09-2006 12:45 PM
Best Fighter	cheddar cheese	Old Threads	1032	01-25-2005 03:19 AM