Bismarck

what could the bismarck actually do realistically. I mean what could 1 battleship do against overwhelming numbers anyways.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_aircraft_carrier_Graf_Zeppelin
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_off_Samar
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Sink

FPBP

It was a stupid idea. Building a ship with the same armament (8 x 15 inch guns) which had been the standard for over 20 years. Germany needed to build a ship which would render all other battleships obsolete. And instead, they came up with just another 15 inch gunned battleship, with slightly better speed and armor than all of those other 15 inch gunned battleships.

It wasn't that the Bismarck was a serious threat in and of itself to British Naval Power, it was that it was an out and out breaking of the treaty that kept Germany weak.

Prior to the Bismark, Germany was making larger ships that allowed, and just lieing about their actual tonnage.

Between a u boat wolf pack and the Bismarck you could sink a whole convoy. Most of the escort destroyers would easily be taken out (possibly sunk, but more likely drawn away from the convoy) without posing much of a threat to Bismarck. That would leave a lot of the supply convoy undefended. Really, it wasn't what the big ship could do, it was what it could allow to be done.

The idea was not for one big Ogre that could take on all other navies at once. It was just to rebuild German navy to be competitive, and eventually just outnumber other navies. It was a matter of national pride rather than military objectives.

>be Hans
>build most advanced warship ever to sail the seas
>get bong'd by Nigel in his WWI-tier biplane
How can Germans even compete?

But more uboats could have done the same thing. And been cheaper.

personally i think they shouldve just built a shitton of standardized ships but what do i know

triggering the international community instead of using flaws in the treaty is 4D chess. this is why they lost.

Absolutely. It was a classic blunder of thinking you could get away with a lot more shit than you could. Germany thought they could get a bit more ships built before it became a flash point. Britian said, no way kaiser!

The Kriegsmarine surface fleet never stood a chance. It was the right choice for Germany to abandon the idea of a large surface fleet because it would never have been able to score any meaningful victories against the already massive British and American navies. U-boats were the only option that could grant any success.
you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. First of all, the surface ships of the Kriegsmarine had fire control systems so advanced that the US military couldn't even figure out how to operate them, putting the Bismarck well ahead of being "just another battleship". Second of all, super battleships are a meme and never panned out. Look at the Yamato, it hardly ever left port because it used such an excessive amount fuel. When it finally had a mission it was shit on by carrier aircraft because it was so big and slow.

Typical German autism. Either you build the biggest baddest ship or nothing. They pour all of your energy and resources into one enormous project and then get btfo'd by neurotypicals. Even if they made a shit ton of Battlecruisers that were smaller but far more mobile than the average Battleship, they would have been like wolves surrounding its prey.

Well, in the Denmark Strait the Bismarck destroyed the bongs' flagship, the Hood, in about 2-3 minutes of combat, and then turned on the other bong warship, the Prince of Wales, and pummeled it into submission and would have destroyed it as well, but the krauts decided to break off the action. So it was a fairly competent and representative weapon of its time, even if the time for such warfare was passing away. Bismarck was destroyed because the autistic krauts were ever autistic and reported in to base and gave away their position, at a moment when the retarded bongs were reeling and clueless as to where it was. It was a battle of autism against mental retardation, and both lost.

you're forgetting the part where it was a literal swarm of swordfish, try shooting down 50 planes at once with one ship

>protip, they can't

Now imagine if they built a swarm of ships instead of building one huge autistic one.

the sinking of the Hood is an extreme example of how nasty naval combat is
>one (1) armor piercing shell hits the Hood just right and penetrates the ammo storage
>ammo detonates, massive explosion, almost everyone on the ship fucking dies instantly

pic related

Germany didn't have the capacity to build lots of surface ships, and having more ships would have just resulted in more sunken ships. Germany had no way to outnumber the British surface fleet, so they focused on quality over quantity. Why do you keep thinking that a country building a navy from scratch in the interwar could compete with one of the largest, most powerful navies on earth?

Honestly this, or just use all of the steel that'd go into building an average surface fleet into building a massive u-boat fleet that would be able to destroy convoys and have an overwhelming presence

where uboats even that good back then?

Yes, and one (1) torpedo from a retarded bong squadron, that had almost attacked their own ship earlier, struck just right in the Bismarck's steering gear and crippled it from proper maneuver, sentencing its crew to death hours later.

Don't you dare start talking shit about mein schwerer Gustav!

>tons of resources wasted on building a huge cannon
>takes tons of resources just to fucking move it
>was not decisive in any of the battles it participated in
reeee
Hitler had massive autism in regards to building big things. The Schwerer Gustav was pretty much 100% his idea. He also commissioned Ferdinand Porsche to design the Maus, another pants-on-head retarded idea

ill give it credit for taking out a city but realistically i should have been used more or the scientific resources used to build it should have been used somewhere else

U-boats weren't able to have a big strategic effect but they were very deadly even at later stages of the war

Ah well he went Protoss but he should've gone Zerg with U-boats
how many U-boats got cancelled for this? 300?

>First of all, the surface ships of the Kriegsmarine had fire control systems so advanced that the US military couldn't even figure out how to operate them
This guy has the right idea.
Scharnhorst fired the longest hit on a moving target in the entire war

Nazi U-boats were good enough to cripple the bongs irl, but they didn't have many of them. The krauts should have eschewed massive surface warships and applied those resources to U-boat production, as a better investment.

Ja I know..

Just like japs cruiser Chokai. It cached single 127mm shell from escort carrier that detonated her torpedoes.
But wehr*abos usually say that Hood hit wasn't pure luck and bism*rck was some super ship or something. I talked with some shitter, who genuinely believed that kriegsm*rine was on same level with IJN and US Navy.

holy shit i just emerged from a layer of autism to realize that this ship is from ww2 not ww1. no wonder i was confused about uboat replies. germans were always autistic though

>1000+ uboats
>not very many
what is the metric by which we measure "many"?

it was sank by outdated sopwith camel ww1 planes that flew at it head on and sank it with a torpedo lmao

its like a spitfire sinking americas latest atomic battleship lmao

their cannon shells was designed to explode a short time after leaving the cannon but cause the planes was so slow the shellfire never touched them due to the timing

the bismark was sank by outdated tech of planes that was due to be scrapped and was only being used cause it was better than leaving them in mothballs

stay mad germans

Around that time battleships were already obsolete. I don't get why Germany never built a carrier.

wreck the Hood then get wrecked herself

if only they made it nuclear powered

...

>I don't get why Germany never built a carrier.
We started building one, the Graf Zeppelin. But Carriers where an untested thing at the time they decided to scratch it to put the recources in more experienced fields

britain can into flat tops

this was a ww1 ship also,looks nice

Germany wasn't the only ones that clung to the idea of battleships. The US held on to hers until the 1980s. Admirals are notorious for being very "Old Guard."

But it looked cool.

you realize torpedoes can sink every ship no matter armor right? oh wait you are burger

The anti-air defences of the Bismarck were crippled by an earlier hit IIRC

>build zepplin
>ayoo lets bomb london
>oh noez the british invented incendiary rounds retreat!

and thus the zepplin died.

>never built a carrier
they partially completed an aircraft carrier hull in the 1930's but abandoned the idea because they realized it would never work
>would require special carrier aircraft that would be a pain in the ass to set aside a production line for
>would be extremely vulnerable to basically everything since Germany lacked naval superiority
>would most likely be sunk in port before even doing anything
tl;dr you need lots of escort ships in order for a carrier to be anything more than a floating death trap, and Germany had few escort ships to spare.

Nazi optics were fairly good, but don't get carried away on all that. Optics were losing their significance even then. The US was building warships even then that could turn multiple figure 8's in combat and never lose an accurate firing solution during those maneuvers. Their radar was sensitive enough so that they could spot shell splashes around their target (and in the dark, which is what made them so deadly). At Surigao Strait, a Japanese force with even better optical sighting and nightfighting capability than the krauts was destroyed with minimal losses, because of these more modern features, in arguably the last surface fleet gunbattle in history.

germany shouldve built a small maneuverable ship with 2 torpedo slots and advanced fire control systems. spam the fuck out of them and zerg.

Doesnt matter the war was lost before it began.
Battleships were obsolete even then it was just subs vs destroyers and carriers owned the rest.

>Be German
>Build Boat
>Get sunk

You'd have to ignore the 1,000 total wartime production figure and look at the number present at the start of the war, which was quite limited. The autistic krauts had a total of about 12 that could make long range patrols into blue water at the start of the war. 200 would have had the bongs starving, but I guess Shickelgruber liked big cannons and meth more.

its not like it would matter if the enemy copied the tactic anyways since the ships would be small and they didnt need maritime trade

>what could the bismarck actually do realistically. I mean what could 1 battleship do against overwhelming numbers anyways.

In World of Warships you can command the Bismarck.
BBs have a shit ton of armor but they are slow, take forever to reload there cannons, have a massive amount of shell spread and get shit on by all the other classes.
I havent played since last year but I sank a Yamato with torpedo spam who made the mistake of getting way out in front of the rest of his fleet.
If I were going to build a navy it would be a few fast CVs, CLs, A few CAs for carrier escort and a shit ton of DDs.

The Bismarck, as were all of Germany's capital ships in WWII, were intended as surface raiders destroying Allied shipping, not as ships that would go toe-to-toe with the Royal Navy. The strategy of destroying Allied shipping was governed by two competing philosophies in the Kriegsmarine: the surface fleet strategy of Raeder and the u-boat strategy of Doenitz. Eventually Hitler realized Doenitz was right and that the surface fleet was a huge waste but by that point the war had already turned against Germany.

nah we would of just got desperate and broke out the anthrax bombs m8

this is what we did to dresen with just bombs,if our people was starving then dropping anthrax all over germany would of been next.

>meth
>other drugs
>hitler
>rail against degeneracy
>lose against it personally and on wider scale
literally hitler

Actually I was talking about the Ship Graf Zeppelin
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_aircraft_carrier_Graf_Zeppelin

Thats true, the radar was far superiour.
Lol when a german officer asks the brits why they seem to see the german planes much earlier then the germans where able to spot anything they replied 'We eat more carrots, the Vitamin A is better for your eye sight' and that saying stick with us since today..

Sadly, the Gneisenau and the Scharnhorst where in Brest during the attack.. and the only reason why it was found was because some high ranked officer keep demanding to know where his son (who was a sailor on the Bismarck) will make landfall again..

I never looked at it from that perspective.
another problem was the lack of a naval air arm. Donitz asked for the creation of one but Göring chimped out and had Hitler tell Donitz "go back to playing with your submarines faggot." Thus anti-shipping operations were hampered because the Kriegsmarine had to constantly beg for air support.

and have it fire nuclear warheads

Yeah, the bongs had a doomsday weapon, no doubt. I hope I'm still around when that all comes out of the archives.

>Perhabs war is the bad guy
Schmitt is a wise man

Fuck I wish London had gotten nuked

I wish even more that it would be nuked today

They could have built a lot of small, fast ships that could slip in and out of conflict more easily than larger ships. They might not have been able to compete exactly, but they would have been doing a lot better and they would have been able to inflict more damage with some strategic inventiveness. So what if more ships sunk? If you sink 4 small ships out of 50 its still less damning and less expensive than the sinking of one enormous ship that constitutes the bulk of your surface Navy. Making a number of small ships is basically akin to distributing hitpoints. Coordinating them would probably offer more firepower, not less, even if the guns were smaller. Even if they spent the money and resources that they poured into the Bismarck on nothing but a ton of Uboats, they would have been more competitive. The Germans put all of their eggs in one basket time and time again, and they get fucked for it, time and time again.

Be love.

their whole master-race outlook and autistic devotion to building bigger things fucked them. they were averse to zerging as a result.

Yes, the autistic krauts sucked at naval aviation, and were fortunate that the retarded bongs sucked equally hard.

To be fair, the KM surface fleet was meant to act as a Fleet in Being. Plus the RN was still in such terror of another Jutland that they refused to engage the KM and unescorted transports during Operation Weserübung.

>the surface ships of the Kriegsmarine had fire control systems so advanced that the US military couldn't even figure out how to operate them

The North Carolina class, which was laid down a few months after the Bismarck class was, was capable of firing its first round from a turret, watch the round on radar and then correct any trajectory variances due to weather, air density, etc, and alter the aim of the following shots in the salvo from the rest of the guns. The Bismarck also had a radar wavelength almost 30 times larger than what the USN fielded and 8 times larger than what the RN put to sea at the same time. The Japanese also had superior optical sighting systems than the Bismarck had.

it was a manifestation of german autism and it ended like every other german ambition

don't post boatsluts here roach this is a big boy discussion

US used a battleship in Gulf War.

>They could have built a lot of small, fast ships that could slip in and out of conflict more easily than larger ships. They might not have been able to compete exactly, but they would have been doing a lot better and they would have been able to inflict more damage with some strategic inventiveness. So what if more ships sunk? If you sink 4 small ships out of 50 its still less damning and less expensive than the sinking of one enormous ship that constitutes the bulk of your surface Navy. Making a number of small ships is basically akin to distributing hitpoints. Coordinating them would probably offer more firepower, not less, even if the guns were smaller. Even if they spent the money and resources that they poured into the Bismarck on nothing but a ton of Uboats, they would have been more competitive. The Germans put all of their eggs in one basket time and time again, and they get fucked for it, time and time again.


Lessons learned from the battle of Leyte Gulf.


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_off_Samar

>Look at the Yamato, it hardly ever left port because it used such an excessive amount fuel. When it finally had a mission it was shit on by carrier aircraft because it was so big and slow.

Yamato was shit on by a couple of aggressive destroyer escorts.

Bisco a best.

To be fair, the reactivation of the Iowas the first time was due to their guns being good for shore bombardment (More than a few ground pounders in Vietnam found out that the fire missions they would call in wouldn't be carried out by the 105mms of a firebase, but instead a 16" round from USS New Jersey). Where the reactivation in the 80's was mostly to fit with the whole 500 ship navy demand, so they removed all the glorious 5" turrets and put on Harpoons and TLAMs

I'm mainly basing the second part of what I posted from accounts of the US Navy's experience with the Prinz Eugen after the war, in which some sources state that the sailors (a composite crew of Americans and Germans) struggled to operate the ship

We should've kept one of the battleships on as a flagship and counter to the Kirov-class battlecruisers.

They were hoping there would be no war till after 1945. By then they would have made the real big ships. Bismark and Tirpitz were stopgaps to match the British. Also I think the 400mm+ guns just were not ready or developed yet.

The US kept the battleships around as they were already built and never saw hard use, but they were repurposed and would never have been used as they were originally designed. Nobody would build one of those beasts today, I should think, not even the profligate spending USA.

They did very well until patrol planes with special equipment made their casualty rates skyrocket later on.

It could engage ships of similar size in a one-on-one fight, which is what it was designed to do.

Problem is that billion dollar ships are increasingly easy to sink with weapons built at a fraction of the cost.

I always have a giggle when I see boatslut threads or boatslut doujins, because the majority of people that like it don't know any naval history
example:
popular boatslut amatsukaze was sunk by a fucking B-25
>pic related

Fuck you. Don't insult my wife

We should go back to building monitors. Size and price of a destroyer with the guns of a battleship

they were great until advancements in radar made it pretty much impossible for them to surface near any radar equipped ship without being spotted
also dedicated search aircraft made their life rough

STOP THIS. THAT'S EITHER A SCHOOP OR A FALSE FLAG ATTACK.

DELET THIS

being relaxed enough to have time to film it is almost ultimate disrespect
i love it

You can do all that and more with a few missiles on a barge. Shoot farther and more accurately and for cheap.

where can i learn about naval history? thx

That’s funny, the USN Or IJN would if smoked any other nation’s navy in WW2. Churchill realized this in the 30s, when he made his pro America pivot.

Maybe that is why she wears transparent uniform, a homage to her fragility.
>naval history
>a DD is sink
Who cares?
You burgers realized;
>In air offense>>>>>defense, thereby instead of AA stacking you produced moar planes with better tech
>You also figured out not everyone can fly a plane so you installed ejection systems to to your planes, experience accumulated for US pilots, while Nip pilots despite being better and far more courageous kept dying
>you also realized hit&runs are more effective than conclusive big battles, CV's are the future and superior to the any other form of ships
>you also realized CV's need protection so you used carrier divisions
>put humongous industrial power and resources on top of that
In hindsight, I don't know how Nips stood their for that long.
You have the most lovely wife user.

Still, 15 inch guns have a touch to them that even missiles can't match. The Iraqis were so terrified of them that they surrendered the Kuwaiti islands without a fight after the USS Missouri shelled their positions.

if you like U-Boats definitely check out Uboat.net, it's a super comprehensive site on the history of U-boats.

Let me post for you a very sad story I found on uboat.net
>American naval patrol plane spots surfaced U-boat off the northern coast of south america
>drops torpedos
>U-boat shoots down patrol plane
>torpedos hit U-boat
no survivors from either side. Nobody knew what happened for weeks.

Glory in Death.

>well congratulations, you got yourself torpedoed
>now what's the next step of your master plan?
>crashing this plane...

another ship thread invaded by autists

Just don't post a photo of Anne Frank. Then shit gets really weird.

were you in that how does this... lead to this thread yesterday?

sure favorited but what about cruisers and battleships? besides obviously wikipedia I dont have any sources. is there a golden standard?

for example, Stanford Encyclopedia Philosophy is an academic source

Sure I could order random books off amazon but I have no idea of their credibility