Read the forum code of contact
By: - 25th May 2005 at 09:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I never quite understand this one...it is very obvious that the Hood is the much older and inferior one (a battlecruiser), so it should come at no surprise that a 1v1 duel would end that way. The loss of life is horrendous, but why no-one questions the decision to use her against the Bismark. Now, the other newer battleship, that's a much better match...unfortunately, that didn't fair that well either.
By: - 25th May 2005 at 10:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes, I agree. If I were handicapping such a fight, I would favor the British forces. Neither Hood nor PoW was individually a match for Bismarck (Hood because she was unmodernized and PoW because she was so green), but together they were more powerful than the German side.
By: - 25th May 2005 at 16:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Germans had a master at the Helm and they were very cunning with their actions, the loss of Hood was very unfortunate but very nessecary and I only say that to make this point, it was a big slap in the face for the British who thought that they ruled the waves, this made them rethink all their plans for fighting on the water.
The main thing that was against her was the fact that the British had stuck to the Arms limitation treaties even after Japan and Germany had left and war was on the horizon. You have to laugh at the pomposity of the British at this time they really thought that they could beat everyone on water, sure they had ruled the oceans for hundreds of years but for every up, there has to be a down. The Bismark taught them a lesson that they learned very quick. Guess they should have been lucky that they never went up against the Yamato or Musashi!
Don't get me wrong guys, I do pray for those souls lost, but war is about lessons, and the British finally learned a hard one that day.
By: - 25th May 2005 at 18:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't think I can agree with you there. The ones who got the real lesson from this operation were the Germans. I can't identify a single major change in RN practice arising from the "lesson" of Hood's loss, while Rhienubung ended any German pretense to high-seas raiding by their warships. Never again did a warship go out on an Atlantic cruise. The more expendable AMCs did, but warships were subsequently restricted to sortying after specific targets--and that didn't turn out to well either.
By: - 26th May 2005 at 09:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes, the Germans went into the war with a navy that was hardly optimized for the scenario they were facing. The Bismarcks were conceived at a time when the anticipated foe was a Baltic power or perhaps France, and Hitler had secured via treaty a fleet equal to that of France. Honestly, I'm not sure what naval deployment was anticipated for a war against France. (Scharnhorst, on a really big trolley, steaming across the Ardennes....) In WWI, the Germans had found gainful employment for their battle fleet to the east, and I wonder how Barbarossa might have developed had the Germans taken a similar approach in 1941. The Soviets had nothing that could have stood up to Tirpitz, but the Germans opted instead to play small ball (baseball reference!) and depend on mines and coastal craft. I can't say this was a poor choice, and it definitely had the intended result, but that doesn't stop me wondering.
Posts: 152
By: Tiornu - 24th May 2005 at 14:35
On this day, I think it's fitting to call to memory HMS Hood and her crew.