Bismarck anti-torpedo bulges

Aktungbby · 12-25-13, 01:00 AM

Original! but they didn't go aft far enough to prevent the Swordfish hit to the steering and they didn't work against an underwater trajectory fluke 14 inch shell from King George to armor sections XIII and XIV at the beam weld under the main side-armor belt to the inner 45 mm inner armor. This welding, in its infancy technique-wise and the frigid water temperatures made the steel and welds brittle. Subsequent torpedoes from Dorsetshire had little effect and the evidence is clear from a Ballard expedition, much to British chagrin, that the Germans scuttled their vessel as rumored. Moreover Bismark bulge defenses were tested against 500 kg torpedo war heads not 14 in. main battery shells which were expected to land top side ie. cracking fire as opposed to direct fire. In her defeat, HMS Hood (a faster 'battle cruiser with weak deck armor) was attempting to close the distance to get under Bismark's downward 'cracking' fire to a closer position where her own belt and turret armor could withstand 'direct' fire, approx. 11,500 meters...she didn't make it. In my hasty research for your question, oddly enough, Bismark's overall defensive armor rating( deck and side) is about 6 whereas Iowa, Yamato and King George are 9+

12-25-13, 01:00 AM	#5
Aktungbby Gefallen Engel U-666 Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: On a tilted, overheated, overpopulated spinning mudball on Collision course with Andromeda Galaxy Posts: 30,150 Downloads: 24 Uploads: 0	Original! but they didn't go aft far enough to prevent the Swordfish hit to the steering and they didn't work against an underwater trajectory fluke 14 inch shell from King George to armor sections XIII and XIV at the beam weld under the main side-armor belt to the inner 45 mm inner armor. This welding, in its infancy technique-wise and the frigid water temperatures made the steel and welds brittle. Subsequent torpedoes from Dorsetshire had little effect and the evidence is clear from a Ballard expedition, much to British chagrin, that the Germans scuttled their vessel as rumored. Moreover Bismark bulge defenses were tested against 500 kg torpedo war heads not 14 in. main battery shells which were expected to land top side ie. cracking fire as opposed to direct fire. In her defeat, HMS Hood (a faster 'battle cruiser with weak deck armor) was attempting to close the distance to get under Bismark's downward 'cracking' fire to a closer position where her own belt and turret armor could withstand 'direct' fire, approx. 11,500 meters...she didn't make it. In my hasty research for your question, oddly enough, Bismark's overall defensive armor rating( deck and side) is about 6 whereas Iowa, Yamato and King George are 9+ __________________ "Only two things are infinite; The Universe and human squirrelyness?!!