A little late. The free app I was using to transfer photos from my phone to my computer updated and then demanded money for it to work. I deleted it but had to find another way. I did, so here we are.
My recent work was the Bismarck.
A long build given the number of pieces. I got through the bow with seemingly no problems.
I then got the stern done and tried to connect. Quelle horror! Somehting was slightly off. I couldn’t see where so I had to tear down the bow and rework it. I don’t know how I messed up the first time around but the second time was the charm.
After that it was clear sailing to the end.
Looks pretty neat. Next build will probably be a lot smaller, a scout car of some such. Haven’t decided which. I think I will wait until the new year. I hope everyone will have joyous one. How bad will 2024 be?
KMS Bismarck
Bismarck was the first of two Bismarck-class battleships built for Nazi Germany‘s Kriegsmarine. Named after Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, the ship was laid down at the Blohm & Voss shipyard in Hamburg in July 1936 and launched in February 1939. Work was completed in August 1940, when she was commissioned into the German fleet. Bismarck and her sister ship Tirpitz were the largest battleships ever built by Germany, and two of the largest built by any European power.
In the course of the warship’s eight-month career, Bismarck conducted only one offensive operation that lasted 8 days in May 1941, codenamed Rheinübung. The ship, along with the heavy cruiser Prinz Eugen, was to break into the Atlantic Ocean and raid Allied shipping from North America to Great Britain. The two ships were detected several times off Scandinavia, and British naval units were deployed to block their route. At the Battle of the Denmark Strait, the battlecruiser HMS Hood initially engaged Prinz Eugen, probably by mistake, while HMS Prince of Wales engaged Bismarck. In the ensuing battle Hood was destroyed by the combined fire of Bismarck and Prinz Eugen, which then damaged Prince of Wales and forced her retreat. Bismarck suffered sufficient damage from three hits by Prince of Wales to force an end to the raiding mission.
The destruction of Hood spurred a relentless pursuit by the Royal Navy involving dozens of warships. Two days later, heading for occupied France for repairs, Bismarck was attacked by fifteen Fairey Swordfish torpedo bombers from the aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal; one scored a hit that rendered the battleship’s steering gear inoperable. In her final battle the following morning, the already-crippled Bismarck was engaged by two British battleships and two heavy cruisers, and sustained incapacitating damage and heavy loss of life. The ship was scuttled to prevent her being boarded by the British, and to allow the ship to be abandoned so as to limit further casualties. Most experts agree that the battle damage would have caused her to sink eventually.
The wreck was located in June 1989 by Robert Ballard, and has since been further surveyed by several other expeditions.
Previous Build
Fokker Dr. 1 “Red Baron”
The Fokker Dr.I (Dreidecker, “triplane” in German), often known simply as the Fokker Triplane, was a World War I fighter aircraft built by Fokker-Flugzeugwerke. The Dr.I saw widespread service in the spring of 1918. It became famous as the aircraft in which Manfred von Richthofen gained his last 17 victories (plus two earlier ones in the Fokker F.I prototype in September 1917), and in which he was killed on 21 April 1918.
That ship model is way too big..
“We’ve got to shrink the Bismarck, all the world depends on us…”
I saw an interview with one of the Bismark’s few survivors from its fire direction team. To the question about whether Bismark was involved in the sinking of the Hood, he answered that Bismark never hit the Hood, and that Bismark hadn’t even straddled Hood prior to its destruction. In the first 15 minutes of the final battle, Bismark’s 4 main turrets were knocked out, the bridge was hit, and both primary and secondary fire directors were made inoperable. So they couldn’t steer, shoot, or aim – and so couldn’t fight back. The British ships were in the process of trying to save Bismark’s crew when a German submarine’s periscope was sighted. The British ships, fearing being sunk by torpedoes, abandoned the rescue effort and fled. But the sub was actually out of torpedoes. As a result of this, most of Bismark’s crew were lost.
In a final irony, the hunt for Bismark after the Hood’s destruction was driven by revenge for the Hood, yet the ship that actually sunk the Hood, Prinz Eugen, survived the war.
Did not know that it was only the Prince Eugen’s fire that destroyed the Hood. All the sources I’ve read or heard say it was either combined fire or just the Bismarck gett ing the lucky hit that exploded the magazines.
I’ve seen the same sources you have. The error has been repeated so many times that finding the truth is nearly impossible on line. Only the interview I mentioned clearly states otherwise (which I saw 25 years ago on the Military channel – I’ve never been able to find it on line), plus what was seen when the Hood was found and examined.
Prinz Eugen had a 50% higher rate of fire, and so was able to straddle Hood quickly. Bismark had an admiral on board who refused to allow Bismark to open fire. Repeated requests to open fire from the fire direction team were ignored by the admiral (who was under orders to avoid unnecessary combat with British naval vessels and concentrate on attacking cargo ships; as if firing BACK at British naval vessels was “unnecessary”) until the captain finally gave permission. Prinz Eugen repeatedly hit Hood, starting a fire in Hood’s aft 4 inch AA magazine. Evidence from examining Hood seems to indicate that this fire spread forward through the ammunition handling trunks, and ignited the main magazine that resulted in the loss of Hood. This fits with British operational tendencies, as in WWI’s battle of Jutland they lost several capital ships because they defeated the safety systems that ensured that only 1 of 3 blast doors between the gun compartment and the main magazines could be open at one time. With all three open at once, a hit in the gun turret could chain fire down the ammunition path and detonate the main magazine. The crews did this to increase rate of fire. Hood may have been doing something similar that increased her vulnerability (my hypothesis, I’ve not seen anything that says so specifically, but with only 3 survivors, none of whom were stationed below decks, nobody who would know survived).
At the range involved when Hood exploded, Bismark’s fire would have been coming in at 11 degrees from the horizontal, and Prinz Eugen’s fire 22 degrees from horizontal. Fire impacting at angles less than 20 degrees from parallel to an armor plate is likely to ricochet, with the likelihood of it happening rising as the angle is reduced. The “lucky shot” from the Bismark would have ricocheted off the deck armor. But, if the fire spread theory mentioned above didn’t kill Hood, a lucky shot from Prinz Eugen, penetrating in just the right place while a safety door was open to the main magazine, could have done so. Even if Hood’s crew was following proper safety procedures, doors to the main magazine have to be opened periodically in order to replenish ammunition and propellant in the main gun turrets.
From a national pride standpoint, I think the British at the time would have been unwilling to accept the idea that an 8 inch gun cruiser like Prinz Eugen could have sunk the Hood. Hood was thought to be the largest combat ship in the world, having been built before naval treaties restricted tonnage to 40,000 (she was 47,000). In reality, Bismark was 59,000 tons (Germany lied and claimed she was 39,000; Tirpitz finished out at 61,000) and Yamato, largest ever built, at 68,000 tons, was still a secret and wasn’t finished yet (she was completed and was part of the fleet that attacked Pearl Harbor). Hood was the pride of the British fleet, and the idea of her loss to Prinz Eugen would have been a major embarassment to the Royal Navy. Whatever actually happened, they needed to destroy Bismark, as she posed a major threat to supply convoys in the North Atlantic. If revenge for the Hood helped motivate those chasing Bismark, well, that wasn’t a bad thing at the time.
Interesting. Thanks for the info.
I would be curious on your take of this video. This guy, Drachinifel does naval history. Quite deep dives and material is well sourced. I’m not expert enough offer an opinion that would be definitive but I do think he is right in his observations. He also acknowledges when the information might not support a certain conclusion but does support others. In the case of the Hood he doesn’t feel the data supports the Prince Eugen lucky shot hypothesis but that a luck hit by Bismarck seems to fit the known observations and structural data. If you have problems with the presentation let us know, a nice discussion should be fun.