View Single Post
Old 2015-03-01, 17:33   Link #51
Kakurin
大佐
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by AC-Phoenix View Post
Too long for today, tomorrow.
The same side also shows statistcs that Iowa's and Bismarcks guns could have both penetrated Yamato's deck armor. Bismarcks penetration being slightly below

[...]

http://www.combinedfleet.com/f_guns.htm
Maybe I'm reading those numbers wrong(Considering that I'm bad at math very possible) - But her deck armor would have gotten penetrated at Bismacks maximum Range which was roughly 40'000 km
To be blunt, it's much more complicated than that. While Bismarck's guns could've penetrated up to 9.3" of armour at maximum range it only factors in a single sheet of that thickness. Ships' deck armour layout, however, is much more complex. Some ships have more than one armoured deck. Then there are also other objects and layers obstructing the path, so even if the initial deck is penetrated the damage will be limited. And Yamato's deck armour was pretty much impenetrable for Bismarck's 38cm guns. There was only a single 6.1x12.2m window where Bismarck's shell could've penetrated and then the damage would be limited to a single boiler room only (there are 12 total in the area). The complete analysis of Yamato's deck armour against Bismarck's 38cm guns is here:

Spoiler for Yamato's deck armour:


Quote:
And I pointed to the documentary because it was generally interesting, due to having interior shots as well as the precise damage done by all weapons inspected from really close range.
in the end a total of over 2000 (2800 I think?) Shots were fired with, according to Wikipedia ~400 hitting, with a penetration of mere 4 shells at the armor belt.

In other worlds less than 1 percent of all fired shots during that battle actually penetrated her hull.
Up until here its still fine, but the english battleships also fired from afar. Even if you take flat 2000 shells fired in total thats a hit rate of less than 1 % on a ship that could only go in circles.
So unless the Bismarck was still pretty good at escaping those shotsm a lot of the hits that were close enough(Edit: as in impacted close enough) to damage her still didn't manage to do so.
Bismarck's side armour was pretty weak. Her strength stemmed from an internal armour behind the main belt. Factoring in the loss of the AP cap and speed from the belt armour Bismarck's internals were pretty much impenetrable. So yeah, just looking from a single penetration angle the armour looks fantastic.

However, that design also had shortcomings that make it doubtful whether it really provided a benefit. First, the weak side armour meant that the upper hull area (where some critical equipment and cables were stored) could be taken out at far greater ranges than for other battleships. Meaning it's easier to cripple the ship's ability to actually carry out the fight. Second, this design cost considerable weight - weight that could've been spent to beef up the weak deck armour that was quite vulnerable. Third, the belt armour's shallow extension allowed for dangerous penetration below the waterline, as shown during the engagement with Prince of Wales. There are also additional drawbacks, for that I refer back to the link I posted.

The British ships closing the distance therefore just reduced their chances to actually deal mortal damage. All they did was bang their head against a brick wall. Had they maintained a bigger distance they could've dealt significant damage either via the deck, or through underwater hits.

Quote:
German Ships probably had stern instabilities, which is why they got refits in that regard after Prinz Eugen was damaged.
Do you have a source for that? I suspect you may confuse that for the problems with the stem the Germans had. Due to the rough Atlantic the German ships (especially the Gneisenaus) tended to take on much water which caused floodings in some areas and damage to the equipment. So they refitted practically all capital ships with a so-called "Atlantic bow". Bismarck already had that when she went out to sea.

Quote:
Precision aside, that still doesn't warrant 'no chance' the first thing being that both ships had recon planes, so its not like they wouldn't have known the other one was there.
And that is a reason a pointed to Cameron's documentation - Bismarcks planes were unable to launch.
A couple of recon planes make little difference. First of all, they can cover only a small part of the area. Then, launching them is a very delicate affair that quite often didn't go as planned. Last but not least, spotting by recon plane proved to be prone to human mistakes. Like mistaking ships, reporting the wrong position etc. Radar is far more accurate in this regard.
__________________
Kakurin is offline   Reply With Quote