|
Post by oldpop2000 on Feb 29, 2016 11:09:41 GMT -6
I've just finished a new book, Killing the Bismarck: Destroying the Pride of Hitler's Fleet, which is the story about the chase and destruction of the Bismarck during the early stages of World War II. The author is Ian Ballantyne. As the author states in the introduction, there have been many books about the short life of the Bismarck. This book takes a somewhat different approach to telling the story. Here is his new approach to the telling of the story:
Ballantyne, Iain (2012-09-20). Killing the Bismarck: Destroying the Pride of Hitler's Fleet (Kindle Locations 172-176). Casemate Publishers. Kindle Edition.
Ballantyne, Iain (2012-09-20). Killing the Bismarck: Destroying the Pride of Hitler's Fleet (Kindle Locations 177-182). Casemate Publishers. Kindle Edition.
There are many more quotes but time does not allow for me to put them in here. Suffice it to say, there is fresh material gleaned from diaries, official reports etc. to give the feel of the pursuit and destruction of what the British termed "a corsair bent on piratical exploits in the vast ocean. " For the men of the Royal Navy, the pursuit of the killer of the Hood, an icon in the service, was the major driver behind the pursuit of the Bismarck. However, once the killing was done, due to the fact that it was such a horrific and disgusting business, the British never made much of it. The final moments of the Bismarck were horrific with Rodney closing the range to less than 8000 yards and essentially firing point blank with her nine 16-inch guns into her. The men could see the German sailors trying to get off of Bismarck but being blown to bits with body parts lying all over the upper decks in plain view. After the encounter, Dorsetshire tried to bring German survivors aboard but the presence of a possible U-boat required her to eventually leave the area and many survivors. For a nation with compassion like the British, it wasn't something they wanted to do, but were forced by circumstances.
I recommend the book as a fresh view of the operation to destroy the Bismarck. I am going to present some interesting material about the destruction of Hood and the whole operation in later posts.
|
|
|
Post by steel selachian on Mar 13, 2016 15:22:16 GMT -6
Just to ask, if the Bismarck had escaped being crippled by the Swordfish attack on the night of May 26, had the British made any fallback plans? Given that the RAF launched several air raids on the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau while docked in Brest, I imagine a similar attack would have been planned by Bomber Command if Bismarck had made it back to France.
Overall sounds like an interesting read, especially given the current thinking that the Bismarck was much more a psychological threat than a real military one.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Mar 13, 2016 15:42:02 GMT -6
Just to ask, if the Bismarck had escaped being crippled by the Swordfish attack on the night of May 26, had the British made any fallback plans? Given that the RAF launched several air raids on the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau while docked in Brest, I imagine a similar attack would have been planned by Bomber Command if Bismarck had made it back to France. Overall sounds like an interesting read, especially given the current thinking that the Bismarck was much more a psychological threat than a real military one. This attack by the Swordfish was their last attempt to slow her down. The next day she would have been within Uboat and Luftwaffe cover and reached Brest. As you say, the British would most likely have launched repeated attacks on Brest to disable her. but the chances are slim that they could have really done any real damage. Obviously, the Luftwaffe would have moved fighters near the port to provide air cover so its hard to really believe that any Bomber Command attack would have been completely successful. As to her real value, guerre de course using battleships, cruisers is really a wasted effort. This wasn't the age of sail. The best ship for trade warfare was the submarine and the German's should have used the funds and shipyards to produce more and better submarines. Bismarck, Tirpitz and even Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were white elephants. So, even if Bismarck could have survived, her days were numbered. www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=161983 - here are some ideas of what might have happened. I agree with some, the others are fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by steel selachian on Mar 16, 2016 17:48:57 GMT -6
Just to ask, if the Bismarck had escaped being crippled by the Swordfish attack on the night of May 26, had the British made any fallback plans? Given that the RAF launched several air raids on the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau while docked in Brest, I imagine a similar attack would have been planned by Bomber Command if Bismarck had made it back to France. Overall sounds like an interesting read, especially given the current thinking that the Bismarck was much more a psychological threat than a real military one. This attack by the Swordfish was their last attempt to slow her down. The next day she would have been within Uboat and Luftwaffe cover and reached Brest. As you say, the British would most likely have launched repeated attacks on Brest to disable her. but the chances are slim that they could have really done any real damage. Obviously, the Luftwaffe would have moved fighters near the port to provide air cover so its hard to really believe that any Bomber Command attack would have been completely successful. As to her real value, guerre de course using battleships, cruisers is really a wasted effort. This wasn't the age of sail. The best ship for trade warfare was the submarine and the German's should have used the funds and shipyards to produce more and better submarines. Bismarck, Tirpitz and even Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were white elephants. So, even if Bismarck could have survived, her days were numbered. www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=161983 - here are some ideas of what might have happened. I agree with some, the others are fantasy. My gut feeling is that in terms of damage directly dished out, Bismarck would not have contributed much to the war. Commerce raiding was more of an excuse to make the ships relevant; I have the feeling what they were really there for was to give the Kriegsmarine the appearance of a nascent blue-water battle fleet. The real impact, I think, would have been in stressing the Allies' fleet deployments. Following the Channel Dash, the Germans really had just two capital ships available for action - Gneisenau was bombed in drydock and never put to sea again, so Tirpitz and Scharnhorst were the only available heavies. The threat of just those two vessels - or even one of them - breaking out and threatening the convoys was enough to keep a big chunk of the Royal Navy's Home Fleet tied down well into 1944 and demanded rotations of USN capital ships ( Washington, South Dakota, Alabama, and Iowa all spent tours on Arctic convoy duty with the Home Fleet). I can see a scenario where Bismarck's survival made the RN and USN tie down additional capital ships to the detriment of operations in the Med and Pacific. The specter of the Germans putting together a full squadron consisting of Bismarck, Tirpitz, Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, and a couple of heavy cruisers might have been considered a real threat, especially if having Bismarck escape after sinking Hood and outdueling Prince of Wales made the Kriegsmarine a bit more confident about sending their surface fleet out to play.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Mar 16, 2016 17:55:33 GMT -6
This attack by the Swordfish was their last attempt to slow her down. The next day she would have been within Uboat and Luftwaffe cover and reached Brest. As you say, the British would most likely have launched repeated attacks on Brest to disable her. but the chances are slim that they could have really done any real damage. Obviously, the Luftwaffe would have moved fighters near the port to provide air cover so its hard to really believe that any Bomber Command attack would have been completely successful. As to her real value, guerre de course using battleships, cruisers is really a wasted effort. This wasn't the age of sail. The best ship for trade warfare was the submarine and the German's should have used the funds and shipyards to produce more and better submarines. Bismarck, Tirpitz and even Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were white elephants. So, even if Bismarck could have survived, her days were numbered. www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=161983 - here are some ideas of what might have happened. I agree with some, the others are fantasy. My gut feeling is that in terms of damage directly dished out, Bismarck would not have contributed much to the war. Commerce raiding was more of an excuse to make the ships relevant; I have the feeling what they were really there for was to give the Kriegsmarine the appearance of a nascent blue-water battle fleet. The real impact, I think, would have been in stressing the Allies' fleet deployments. Following the Channel Dash, the Germans really had just two capital ships available for action - Gneisenau was bombed in drydock and never put to sea again, so Tirpitz and Scharnhorst were the only available heavies. The threat of just those two vessels - or even one of them - breaking out and threatening the convoys was enough to keep a big chunk of the Royal Navy's Home Fleet tied down well into 1944 and demanded rotations of USN capital ships ( Washington, South Dakota, Alabama, and Iowa all spent tours on Arctic convoy duty with the Home Fleet). I can see a scenario where Bismarck's survival made the RN and USN tie down additional capital ships to the detriment of operations in the Med and Pacific. The specter of the Germans putting together a full squadron consisting of Bismarck, Tirpitz, Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, and a couple of heavy cruisers might have been considered a real threat, especially if having Bismarck escape after sinking Hood and outdueling Prince of Wales made the Kriegsmarine a bit more confident about sending their surface fleet out to play. It's called a "fleet in being". It doesn't have to accomplish anything, just exist, sail around once in a while and the opponent has to cover it. Sort of like chess, just the threat can change the game. The British before attempting any major landings on the Eurasian continent would have had to disable those capital ships or sink them.
|
|
|
Post by steel selachian on Mar 16, 2016 18:55:59 GMT -6
Exactly. The question is, how much would the Allies have shorted their forces in other theaters to keep a lid on the German surface fleet if Bismarck hadn't been lost and perhaps Gneisenau hadn't been put out of action?
Might the British have drawn down their Mediterranean fleet by a few BBs or carriers to shore up the Home Fleet? Might they have decided to keep Prince of Wales and Repulse close to home, either sending some of their older R-class BBs to Singapore or not sending naval reinforcements altogether? Would it just have been South Dakota and four DDs against Kondo's bombardment force on the night of November 14-15, 1942? It might not have changed the overall course of the war, but a few battles might have gone differently in other theaters.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Mar 17, 2016 7:49:57 GMT -6
How the British Admiralty would have reacted to the survival of Bismarck must be judged by their reaction to Tirpitz. The Home Fleet was based in Scapa Flow which is well placed to prevent the breaking out of the Kriegsmarine but not for maintaining security on Brest to keep an eye on Bismarck along with Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. It was prioritized until the demise of Tirpitz then most of its heavy units were moved to the Far East. As the Battle of the Atlantic intensified, the Western Approaches Command was created. Here is a map and organization chart for the Home Fleet in 1941 - www.naval-history.net/xDKWW2-4101-26RNHome.htmNow how does this picture change with Bismarck's survival? Well, we can eliminate Hood from the Battlecruiser Squadron right away. We can replace her with Queen Elizabeth from Rosyth. However, they are still quite a distance from Brest, which if we agree is the main threat area, then the battleships and battlecruisers will have to be moved. To where? Probably Portland or Liverpool. It really depends on whether those ports can handle the ships, and I don't think they can, so the heavy ships will have to stay at Scapa Flow. This is not practical. So where do we reinforce to watch Bismarck? Well, Gibraltar; Force H from the Mediterranean will have to move ships to Gibraltar and be reinforced by POW and Repulse. I don't see the movement of the Revenge class ships to the Far East. We know Royal Oak was lost, but the others were just too slow(21 knots) to really perform any real services except scouting, convoy escort or shore bombardment. The Far East could be reinforced by two heavy cruisers along with a carrier. This would be a better force for Singapore and India support. All in all, keeping an eye on Bismarck will have to be a cooperative effort between Bomber Command and the Royal Navy. Brest is close to bomber bases in SW England, so this could be advantageous.
|
|
|
Post by andyhall on May 12, 2016 13:01:20 GMT -6
> My gut feeling is that in terms of damage directly dished out, Bismarck would not have contributed much to the war. Battleship Scharnhorst in Langfjord, Norway.True, but as oldpop2000 says, look at the knots the Royal Navy tied itself into, keeping track of and trying to intercept a handful of very powerful surface ships like Tirpitz, Scharnhorst, Gniesenau, and Hipper. Just by having those ships available, ready to sortie from the Norwegian fjords on short notice, the Kriegsmarine tied down a huge share of the RN's resources, many times the size of the German fleet. That's not a war-winning strategy in itself, but it probably contributed more to the German war effort than half a dozen Graf von Spee-type missions that are dramatic but come to a relatively quick end.
|
|
|
Post by steel selachian on May 12, 2016 18:46:31 GMT -6
> My gut feeling is that in terms of damage directly dished out, Bismarck would not have contributed much to the war. Battleship Scharnhorst in Langfjord, Norway.True, but as oldpop2000 says, look at the knots the Royal Navy tied itself into, keeping track of and trying to intercept a handful of very powerful surface ships like Tirpitz, Scharnhorst, Gniesenau, and Hipper. Just by having those ships available, ready to sortie from the Norwegian fjords on short notice, the Kriegsmarine tied down a huge share of the RN's resources, many times the size of the German fleet. That's not a war-winning strategy in itself, but it probably contributed more to the German war effort than half a dozen Graf von Spee-type missions that are dramatic but come to a relatively quick end. True, but at what cost? The pressures of keeping a lid on the German surface fleet might have strained the RN, but in the end the surface ships that were not lost at sea - Tirpitz, Gneisenau, Admiral Scheer, Lutzow, Admiral Hipper, and Prinz Eugen - spent their careers primarily as bomb sponges and drags on manning and logistics. Arguably the cost to the Germans for building, manning, maintaining, and protecting those ships did more damage to their own war effort than that of the Allies. It came at the expense of resources for the U-boat force, which was the arm of the Kriegsmarine that did far more damage to both the RN's warships and the supply convoys going to Britain and the USSR.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 12, 2016 21:31:05 GMT -6
Here are some more thoughts on this interesting subject. The policy for the Kriegsmarine had never reckoned on the English as an opponent during the years of its rebuilding, therefore the German Navy was not equipped in quantity to fight England's seapower, nor was its composition adapted for it. The German's knew that England was dependent upon sea-borne food and raw materials from abroad. The German Navy had to interrupt that flow of goods and building a fleet to fight the British Navy was not the way to do it immediately. The only way left, because a large surface fleet took time. The German surface fleet had been built to fight the French and Russians. When the war started, the German Navy had to adapt to the new paradigm it faced. They only finished the surface ships that were nearing completion, that would be Bismarck, Tirpitz and some heavy cruisers. The rest were scrapped and a plan to increase U-boat construction was commenced.
So, now, you are Admiral Raeder and you have two big battleships, a couple of under gunned battlecruisers, a couple of heavy cruisers, light cruisers and a handful of destroyers. Its not anywhere near enough to tangle with the Royal Navy and now, with the advent of carrier based aircraft and long range bombers, even Wilhelmshaven, Kiel and Bremenhaven, are not entirely safe without fighter bases, AA and radar. So what to do you do with them? You can put them in the Baltic and harass the Russians, but that isn't going gain anything. You can send them through the Denmark Straits to Brest and the other French ports putting them in the same position as the German ports but these ports have less fighter and AA support plus they are easier to attack. About the only thing you can do, is send them to Trondheim and Narvik to protect your shipments of iron ore from Sweden that come via roads leading from Sweden to Narvik. Those are your choices. Where they will go will depend on Nazi grand strategy.
The question now is; what do you do if Bismarck survives, joins up with Scharnhorst and Gneisenau and all come out to attack Allied shipping. Well, the German navy had made big error in not developing a Naval Air arm to protect those big ships and that could not be changed during the war. After the conquest of Norway and western Europe, there were no real tasks for the units of the German fleet in the Arctic Ocean and North Sea except the supply runs and destroyers and the Luftwaffe could adequately handle that task. Something to keep in mind, the German fleet did not have unrep, so destroyers could not make the journey through the North Sea, through the Denmark Straits to the French ports to provide the protection and scouting that the large ships needed to attack convoys. Keep in mind also, the British were reading the German mail, especially the German fleets. However, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau did make some successful sorties in the North Atlantic to destroy about 22 ships and the Bismarck breakout did show that one ship could tie up many British assets.
So, Bismarck reaches Brest with a leaking fuel tank, a badly damaged rudder along with a few torpedo hits with some 15 inch shell holes in her. She probably would arrive on 28 May 1941 and enter the dry dock for extensive repairs. The repairs will require parts from Germany and it might take as long as four months to complete the repairs. During that time, she is a proverbial sitting duck. You can't fix that rudder in the water, not adequately so dry dock it is. Even if the British don't hit Bismarck, they can lay waste to the naval yard and delay the repairs but they might get lucky. We know that hitting a moving ship with a level bomber is almost impossible, but Bismarck won't be moving. So, let's give them five months for repairs. She might be ready by September but October is more likely. However, she and buddies still don't have air support beyond about 200 miles and no destroyers. Remember what happened to Yamato and her lone light cruiser? Well, that is what probably might happen to the three German warships. They might get to a convoy, possibly two and even cooperating with U-boats, whose codes have been broken by the way, they might survive, return to Brest and that might be it for all three. Why, because on December 7th, 1941, the whole game changed. What happens after that is anyone's guess, but a replay of the Channel Dash probably would be the next item.
I can't speculate what might happen after another channel dash, they might all go to Narvik or another northern fjord, go to the Baltic or just sit in German ports and be bomb sponges. As far as assets, it might be better to use them as floating batteries with a minimum crew and let it go at that, using the rest of the crews to serve in U-boats.
|
|
|
Post by andyhall on May 13, 2016 9:43:22 GMT -6
So by the fall of 1941, the U.S. Navy is heavily involved in "Neutrality Patrols," which weren't very neutral, and actively engaging German forces. (Did you have a friend on the good Reuben James?)
The United States had at least three old battleships, Arkansas, New York, and Texas, actively operating in the Atlantic, assigned to the Neutrality Patrol. While IRL they were not all three available at the same time due to refits, it doesn't require too much mangling of history to put two (or all three) of them on the same spot of North Atlantic Ocean as the repaired Bismarck and one or two smaller consorts.
That sounds like an interesting "what if."
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 13, 2016 11:07:02 GMT -6
I just want to mention that on May 26th 1941, A PBY, aircraft Z, initially flown by PO Briggs of 209 Squadron took off from Loch Erne. Around 1000, the pilots changed with Ensign Leonard Smith of the USN taking over controls and at 1010, he saw something, and it was Bismarck. So, in fact, it was a USN pilot that found Bismarck which allowed the Home Fleet to close in on her.
In the Atlantic Squadron consisted of four battleships, all the old ones, seven light cruisers and twenty-five destroyers. After Fleet Problem XX in February 1939, and the issues with Poland, Ranger, two patrol bombers squadrons were transferred to the Atlantic Squadron and in July four heavy cruisers and four modern destroyers.
Here is some more background information. On February 1 1941, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau went into the Atlantic and sank 21 merchant ships, about 500 miles SE of Newfoundland. Hipper attacked a convoy east of the Azores and sant seven ships. These actions alarmed the British and US Navy's. After this the Atlantic Fleet escort force between the two navies was created. Our Atlantic fleet would provide three battleships, four heavy cruisers, eight submarines, eight armed merchant cruisers and several destroyer squadrons. However, those old battleships did not have the firepower to take out Bismarck and Tirpitz. By the summer, Idaho, New Mexico and Mississippi would be used as reinforcements along with one carrier and numerous light forces. The sweeps by the battleships began in April of 1941 by Texas, Arkansas and New York operating out of Newport out toe 50 deg. west longitude and then NE. It is doubtful that the old battleships, cruisers which lacked ASW gear could have taken on the German battleships since they were too slow. Little is known but during the chase after the Bismarck and the Battle of the Denmark Straits, the CNO ordered Wasp and her escorts, along with Quincy and the destroyers Livermore and Kearny to head north to engage Bismarck. It was confirmed that the order specifically stated that the force was to " engage and sink the Bismarck, were she sighted". I believe that this is critical. Had Bismarck and her cohorts attempted a sortie into the Atlantic without air support or destroyers they would have had to deal with the US carriers in the Atlantic all of which had Devastator torpedo bombers and SBD-5 Dive Bombers capable of carrying 1000 lbs. AP ordnance. They would have might have penetrated Bismarck's desk armor or at least, caused great damage to the superstructure and AA guns. This might have helped the Devastator's if they were used. The plan would have been to send in the torpedo bombers first before the German AA guns were manned, then simultaneously the dive bombers to silence the AA along with some fighters to perform SEAD against the deck AA guns also. Our carriers were equipped and trained for just this type of operation which the British were not.
Had Bismarck managed to get repaired and come out, not only would she and her cell mates have been attacked by British and US submarines against which they had no defense, but they would have probably met Victorious and the Home Fleet with the USN Atlantic squadron which would have had Ranger and Wasp with their air groups. Total aircraft might be something in the neighborhood of 146 aircraft consisting of four dive bombers squadrons, two fighter squadron and two torpedo squadron. This a potent force for a group of German warships with no air cover and not destroyers.
I am really interested in your views.
|
|
|
Post by andyhall on May 13, 2016 13:13:02 GMT -6
It would be a very difficult proposition for the Germans to break out and be on the loose for long. In terms of a game, seems like you'd have to have to take one or two of those carrier groups out of the picture entirely during the initial (break out) phase of the operation, just to give the Germans a decent shot at it. There was a board game published several years ago (not the old Avalon Hill game, a newer one) that covers this potential conflict, although the combat resolution apparently leaves a lot to be desired. Honestly, they all do for me at this point; the SaI system has really ruined me for naval board gaming, except when it comes to multiplayer games, because it provides a written record of minute-by-minute granular detail without referencing eleventy-four damage tables and incessant die-rolling.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on May 13, 2016 14:50:43 GMT -6
It would be a very difficult proposition for the Germans to break out and be on the loose for long. In terms of a game, seems like you'd have to have to take one or two of those carrier groups out of the picture entirely during the initial (break out) phase of the operation, just to give the Germans a decent shot at it. There was a board game published several years ago (not the old Avalon Hill game, a newer one) that covers this potential conflict, although the combat resolution apparently leaves a lot to be desired. Honestly, they all do for me at this point; the SaI system has really ruined me for naval board gaming, except when it comes to multiplayer games, because it provides a written record of minute-by-minute granular detail without referencing eleventy-four damage tables and incessant die-rolling. If the German's were notified about the coming attack on Pearl Harbor, then that would be the time to breakout of Brest and attack the convoys. On January 28,1942, Saratoga was torpedoed and had to go to Bremerton for repairs. This forced Yorktown and eventually Wasp to move back to the Pacific and that might have given them a chance. Hindsight is the greatest vision in the world, so it might be better just to get Bismarck repaired and then breakout and attack the convoy's then head to Trondheim via the Denmark Straits which might not be as well covered at that time. This would be difficult, but not impossible to game. How close to reality, is hard to assess. I always treat games as just that.... games, not reality.
|
|
|
Post by steel selachian on May 16, 2016 23:27:10 GMT -6
Pearl Harbor regardless, the USN still had enough assets to commit to the Atlantic. In March 1942 Washington was attached to the British Home Fleet for a period of about four months; she was sent to the Pacific afterwards but Massachusetts was active in the Med for Operation Torch. South Dakota and Alabama were both assigned to the Home Fleet in mid-1943 (to cover for the assignment of King George V and Howe to the Med) and were replaced by Iowa for the remainder of 1943. All of those were very dangerous modern BBs that could have probably cleaned Bismarck's clock; while she had a slight speed advantage over the NC and SD BBs they were better-protected, better-armed, and had the best fire control in the world. As for carriers, Ranger was kept in the Atlantic until the start of 1944 and Wasp was around until June 1942. The British had to deploy some of their assets to the Med (at the time of Bismarck's loss they were at least on paper at a serious disadvantage to the Italian fleet), but coupled with the US reinforcements the Germans would have had a very hard time getting into the Atlantic and making a round trip of it.
The problem the German surface fleet really had was geography. The British Isles sat between them and the North Atlantic convoy routes; they managed some successes early on but after 1941 breaking out into the Atlantic probably would have been a suicide mission. The German and French ports were within range of land-based air attack and the St. Nazaire raid proved just how far the British were willing to go to crimp German capital ship operations in the Atlantic. Norway was less exposed to land-based air attack, but the capital ships there were easily bottled up by the Home Fleet and fuel shortages. One does wonder if they would have fared better as crater-makers in the Baltic.
|
|