9
9
0
For all you Navy enthusiasts, some nice video of the HMS Hood.
Incredible 1939 Color Footage Of HMS Hood At Sea
Posted from warhistoryonline.comPosted in these groups: 
Military History
WWII World War Two
Military History WWII World War Two
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 6
6
6
0
SPC Kevin Ford thanks for this powerful read and share. One mighty Battleship for the ages!
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel LTC Stephen F.
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel LTC Stephen F.
(6)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
It was a Battle Cruiser, Joe, it sacrificed armor for speed kind of like a Sherman tank with a 17 pounder the British/Canadian Firefly is a good example. This was way better than the weak 75mm or the slightly less weaker 76mm high velocity that most American Shermans had. It was not an 88mm but it did kill Panther and Tiger IIs
(2)
(0)
PO3 Donald Murphy
It was. At the time of her launching, she was the biggest, fastest, most heavily armed ship in the world. Although not as heavily armored as a battleship, in the hands of a competent captain (understanding of her shortcomings), she could and did, kill things. She engaged French ships at Mers El Kabir, sinking one battlecruiser and damaging another. So she was capable of holding her own.
(0)
(0)
SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
LTC (Join to see) - roger that, that is intriguing, good read and share. I have seen many documentaries on ship.
(0)
(0)
SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
PO3 Donald Murphy - roger that, I appreciate this read and share, keep them coming. I would like to see more reads/shares like this one sincerely.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Thanks for sharing SPC Kevin Ford the June 1939 color footage of the HMS Hood which was the first and last Admiral-class battlecruiser built for the Royal Navy ordered fro production in 1916.
Thanks for mentioning me SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
FYI LTC Stephen C. Capt Seid Waddell CW5 (Join to see) CW5 Charlie Poulton SGM David W. Carr LOM, DMSM MP SGT SFC William Farrell SSgt Robert Marx SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" SSgt (Join to see) TSgt Joe C. SGT (Join to see) SGT John " Mac " McConnell SP5 Mark Kuzinski SGT Forrest Stewart SGT Robert Hawks SPC (Join to see) SrA Christopher Wright
Thanks for mentioning me SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
FYI LTC Stephen C. Capt Seid Waddell CW5 (Join to see) CW5 Charlie Poulton SGM David W. Carr LOM, DMSM MP SGT SFC William Farrell SSgt Robert Marx SSG James J. Palmer IV aka "JP4" SSgt (Join to see) TSgt Joe C. SGT (Join to see) SGT John " Mac " McConnell SP5 Mark Kuzinski SGT Forrest Stewart SGT Robert Hawks SPC (Join to see) SrA Christopher Wright
(3)
(0)
(2)
(0)
PO3 Donald Murphy
LTC (Join to see) - In the hands of a competent skipper, she could easily have survived. Remember that she was 800+ feet long and screamed in at 35 knots! Thats a lot of ship to hit. Holland was correct in closing the distance to cut down the German's angle. Problem is, (1) he waited to long to do it and having failed to do it, and especially after just losing 400 men from Prince Eugen's hit, he should have broke off and lived to fight another day. And (2), he had four destroyers and two heavy cruisers sitting back doing nothing. Had he launched a two prong attack, he'd have sunk both ships. Even tho Prince of Wales would still have gun failure, Bismarck would still have been arguing about whether to fight or not. Suffolk and Norfolk were pitbulls and had been shadowing the Germans (and actually are the ones that detected them in the first place) all week. Both ships had seasoned crews and had actually landed hits on the Germans to keep them awake! So Holland could easily have eaten the Germans for breakfast. Why he chose to attack the way he did is a mystery.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
The problem with Hood is her leadership. Two heavy cruisers were already following Bismarck; HMS Suffolk and HMS Norfolk. Admiral Holland chose to engage Bismarck with just HMS Prince Of Wales (POW)(brand new, on sea trials) and HMS Hood. Had he split his forces, he'd have sunk her. Bismarck was under orders to flee, not fight and her captain (Lindemanns) and the Admiral (Lutjens) were arguing. While this was going on, Hood and POW happened upon two German ships with the lead ship assumed to be Bismarck. It was actually the cruiser Prince Eugen. They opened fire. Eugen, under no restrictions, returned fire. After her first salvo, POW lost guns from ten down to one! Ouch! Eugen had Hood's range and hit her boat deck, causing a huge explosion and fire. At this point in time, Eugen has properly corrected for range. At the same moment, POW and Hood realize the rear ship is Bismarck and correct fire. Hood's next broadside straddles Bismarck and Eugen. Radio relays that POW's down for the count and the Germans engage Hood only. Firing faster, Eugen lets off a salvo that strikes Hood again aft/midships near the main mast and ignites her powder mags. As Hood lurches, her next salvo looses and holes Bismarck's forward fuel tank. Bismarck's first salvo comes after the fact and one errant round penetrates POW's bridge. In a rain squall, POW leaves.
Really?
Can't be any other way. Eugen is lead ship. So the furthest ship from her was POW. POW fails after the first salvo so every round causing Eugen extreme fear and panic is coming from Hood. Eugen has to slam everything it has in to Hood. By the time Bismarck's captain overrides the Admiral and brings her into battle, Eugen's had three salvo's. In other words - she has the range. With her third salvo, she had already hit Hood. Again, she has the range. Thin armor is thin armor is thin armor. So an 8 inch shell can go through the deck. POW on the other hand gets a solitary hit through her armored bridge. ARMORED. As in BATTLESHIP ARMOR. A heavy cruiser gun is not going to pierce battleship armor. Also, POW gets hit after Hood blows up. Bismarck's salvos were slower than Eugens. Plus, Eugen's 8 incher couldn't have pierced the bridge. For power and range. Too far to travel. Bismarck was level with POW and had a 15 incher. Tons of power and close range.
So why the lying?
For Bismarck to have been sunk with no kill to it's credit would have been an embarrasment. So German press destroyed Eugen's logs and gave Bismarck credit for sinking Hood. POW in Churchill's eyes, were cowards fleeing the scene. In his opinion, POW should have rammed Bismarck! Captain Leach came close to courtsmartial. He was a pariah and went to Singapore to die. Rumor has it that he survived the sinking of POW by the Japanese but refused to be rescued. Such was his hatred. So to take some of the hate out, POWs lone 14 incher is given credit for Bismarck's fuel tank hit. Problem is, Vickers technicians (who didn't have a dog in the hunt)(and were rightfully pissed at having sea trials turn into actual combat) had no problem retelling that all the guns died after the first volley. Plus POW would have had to fire OVER the Hood to make the hit. Best chance would have been for Admiral Holland to have attacked the Germans from two directions with Hood, Suffolk and two destroyers on one end and POW, Norfolk and two destroyers on the other. Now...we know that POWs guns will still jam, but the two cruisers were pissed at having been put on a leash so that battleships could take on Bismarck. So Suffolk and Norfolk wouldn't have had a problem attacking with only Hood for major support.
Really?
Can't be any other way. Eugen is lead ship. So the furthest ship from her was POW. POW fails after the first salvo so every round causing Eugen extreme fear and panic is coming from Hood. Eugen has to slam everything it has in to Hood. By the time Bismarck's captain overrides the Admiral and brings her into battle, Eugen's had three salvo's. In other words - she has the range. With her third salvo, she had already hit Hood. Again, she has the range. Thin armor is thin armor is thin armor. So an 8 inch shell can go through the deck. POW on the other hand gets a solitary hit through her armored bridge. ARMORED. As in BATTLESHIP ARMOR. A heavy cruiser gun is not going to pierce battleship armor. Also, POW gets hit after Hood blows up. Bismarck's salvos were slower than Eugens. Plus, Eugen's 8 incher couldn't have pierced the bridge. For power and range. Too far to travel. Bismarck was level with POW and had a 15 incher. Tons of power and close range.
So why the lying?
For Bismarck to have been sunk with no kill to it's credit would have been an embarrasment. So German press destroyed Eugen's logs and gave Bismarck credit for sinking Hood. POW in Churchill's eyes, were cowards fleeing the scene. In his opinion, POW should have rammed Bismarck! Captain Leach came close to courtsmartial. He was a pariah and went to Singapore to die. Rumor has it that he survived the sinking of POW by the Japanese but refused to be rescued. Such was his hatred. So to take some of the hate out, POWs lone 14 incher is given credit for Bismarck's fuel tank hit. Problem is, Vickers technicians (who didn't have a dog in the hunt)(and were rightfully pissed at having sea trials turn into actual combat) had no problem retelling that all the guns died after the first volley. Plus POW would have had to fire OVER the Hood to make the hit. Best chance would have been for Admiral Holland to have attacked the Germans from two directions with Hood, Suffolk and two destroyers on one end and POW, Norfolk and two destroyers on the other. Now...we know that POWs guns will still jam, but the two cruisers were pissed at having been put on a leash so that battleships could take on Bismarck. So Suffolk and Norfolk wouldn't have had a problem attacking with only Hood for major support.
(2)
(0)
SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
PO3 Donald Murphy roger that, thank you for the historical response. Amazing! Good/read and share!
(0)
(0)
SPC Kevin Ford
Apparently this is an old controversy, I didn't even know it existed. Thank you.
http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=297
http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=297
Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen? - Naval History Forums
Who really sank the Hood? Bismarck or Prinz Eugen?, history of naval warfare
(0)
(0)
PO3 Donald Murphy
SPC Kevin Ford - "The pride of the Royal Navy sunk by the pride of the German Navy." It was the best headline Hitler could ask for. For many around the world, it was the end of the empire. Britain had already entered the new century (1901) knowing that she couldn't maintain her empire. So Hood and her kind were throwbacks to maintain the semblence of an empire as long as possible until countries could be granted independence, abandoned (India!), etc. The Germans on the other hand, looked at the battle of the River Platte and saw hope: one German ship (Graf Spee) taking on three allies and coming close to victory. So Prince Eugen and Bismarck should have been a dream team. Economically, sinking shipping with submarines is the best because you can't defend against it. You can't see them. A ship with radar could pick up two huge-ass warships and give ample time to evade. Whereas you really didn't know you were under U-boat attack until the torpedo hit. So the German Navy from day one, wasn't too pleased with resources/money being wasted on two white elephants (Bismarck/Tirpitz). Mers El Kebir, River Platte and Narvik (one British battleship versus nine German destroyers) told the Germans what they already knew: British gunnery was the best in the world and not about to diminish anytime soon.
So on paper, Admiral Lutjens was right for insisting that Bismarck stick to her orders and avoid a knife fight with Hood. Especially as Hood had been the key gun player at Mers El Kebir. Prince Of Wales was an unknown quantity, but in a "spinal tap" way ("my volume knob goes to 11...") she was impressive having ten guns instead of the German eight. Britain's Sommervile and Cunningham were the naval equivalents of General Patton and Cunningham was flying as fast as he could to get onboard Hood. Sommerville likewise, from the opposite direction. Tovey, a newbie but equally vicious, was onboard the POW's sister HMS King George V. Had Churchill not fallen for the German propaganda trap, someone other than Admiral Holland could have taken Hood and then German defeat (again) would have been the headline. Many have critisized Holland as being in deep depression following his son's death, etc, but HMS Hood was a twilight assignment given to a good officer for his retirement. Going out with prestige and honor. So although in charge of Hood, it wasn't because he was a tactical genius. So on that note, Churchill deserved a courtsmartial.
Even as old as she was, Hood still clipped along at 35 knots and was still 800+ feet long! Thats a lot of ship to kill. And she still had eight of the proven/deadly British 15 inch guns and an experienced crew. Had Holland not been so narrow minded and considered that Bismarck 'could' be the second ship (very un-British), he'd have had Bismarck's range and nailed her with the second salvo. Days later, Tovey and his force would overhaul Bismarck and send her to the bottom the way the British do; tons of gunfire and few survivors! Germany claims she scuttled Bismarck and she may very well have set charges, heard them blow up, etc, but underwater damage from three non-lethal and one lethal torpedo kept the sea valves from opening. Besides, Churchill's revenge fury wasn't about to let 2000+ German sailors live to see another day.
So on paper, Admiral Lutjens was right for insisting that Bismarck stick to her orders and avoid a knife fight with Hood. Especially as Hood had been the key gun player at Mers El Kebir. Prince Of Wales was an unknown quantity, but in a "spinal tap" way ("my volume knob goes to 11...") she was impressive having ten guns instead of the German eight. Britain's Sommervile and Cunningham were the naval equivalents of General Patton and Cunningham was flying as fast as he could to get onboard Hood. Sommerville likewise, from the opposite direction. Tovey, a newbie but equally vicious, was onboard the POW's sister HMS King George V. Had Churchill not fallen for the German propaganda trap, someone other than Admiral Holland could have taken Hood and then German defeat (again) would have been the headline. Many have critisized Holland as being in deep depression following his son's death, etc, but HMS Hood was a twilight assignment given to a good officer for his retirement. Going out with prestige and honor. So although in charge of Hood, it wasn't because he was a tactical genius. So on that note, Churchill deserved a courtsmartial.
Even as old as she was, Hood still clipped along at 35 knots and was still 800+ feet long! Thats a lot of ship to kill. And she still had eight of the proven/deadly British 15 inch guns and an experienced crew. Had Holland not been so narrow minded and considered that Bismarck 'could' be the second ship (very un-British), he'd have had Bismarck's range and nailed her with the second salvo. Days later, Tovey and his force would overhaul Bismarck and send her to the bottom the way the British do; tons of gunfire and few survivors! Germany claims she scuttled Bismarck and she may very well have set charges, heard them blow up, etc, but underwater damage from three non-lethal and one lethal torpedo kept the sea valves from opening. Besides, Churchill's revenge fury wasn't about to let 2000+ German sailors live to see another day.
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Thanks for letting me know it was so different!! DD Shaw at Pearl Harbor blowing up in the Drydock
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google