|
Post by oldpop2000 on Apr 16, 2019 14:21:10 GMT -6
Back on the subject of Bismarck one thing that pops up in other forums is how the armor scheme led to important fire control, damage control and electrical cabling mains being run outside the armored deck, but inside the initial 5" armored strake. Good against cruiser fire and I expect lighter non-AP bombs, but vulnerable to battleship fire. All things that are fairly important to the continued operation of your ship. Well, I am still going through drawings and books but my guess is that is has something to do with repair and maintenance but more importantly, restrictions on cutting holes for access into the armored box which the armored deck would be the top of. Those holes would disrupt the integrity of the armored box. I relate to my years working Navy aircraft. Over time, you have to design and build a weapons system with the idea that someone is going to have to repair and maintain this weapon. For a ship, especially one designed primarily for trade warfare, much of that maintenance and repair will have to be done at sea. The easier it is to get at the cabling, the better it is. The same for its repair in the shipyard. If you only have a few types of those ships, the faster it gets into the yards and gets repaired, the faster it gets out. there were probably the main reasons. Just speculating though.
|
|
|
Post by zederfflinger on Jun 1, 2022 23:02:34 GMT -6
If I remember correctly, the author of World War II at Sea: A Global History, seems to insinuate that Lutjens should have tried to sink PoW and flee northward, either back over Iceland or creeping over the Faroes. Not sure if it would have been possible, especially sinking PoW, but it would have been interesting to see the fallout of two capital ships being lost with nothing sunk in return.
|
|