73 years ago the HMS Hood was sunk by the Battleship Bismarck and the course of ww2 changed. - GoFuckYourself.com

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 09:09 AM

Quote:

The Battle of the Denmark Strait was a Second World War naval battle between ships of the Royal Navy and the German Kriegsmarine, fought on 24 May 1941. The British battleship HMS Prince of Wales and the battlecruiser HMS Hood fought the German battleship Bismarck and the heavy cruiser Prinz Eugen, both of which were attempting to break out into the North Atlantic to attack Allied merchant shipping.

Less than 10 minutes after the British opened fire, a shell from Bismarck struck Hood near her aft ammunition magazines. Soon afterward, Hood exploded, and sank within three minutes with the loss of all but three of her crew. Prince of Wales continued to exchange fire with Bismarck but suffered serious malfunctions in her main armament as the British battleship had not fully worked up after only being completed in late March 1941 and soon broke off the engagement.

The battle was considered a tactical victory for the Germans; however, Bismarck was forced to abort her Atlantic mission due to damage suffered to her forward fuel tanks, and was sunk herself three days later.

Some historians think that this naval strategic blunder by the germans changed ww2, if the Bismarck hadn't drawn attention to herself by sinking the Hood, she would have made it to the shipping lanes of the Atlantic and shut down supply lines.

Vendzilla · 05-26-2014, 09:26 AM

Here's some stuff you probably didn't know about WW2

During the Second World War, submarines comprised less than 2 percent of the U.S. Navy, but sank over 30 percent of Japan's navy, including eight aircraft carriers. More important, American submarines contributed to the virtual strangling of the Japanese economy by sinking almost five million tons of shipping—over 60 percent of the Japanese merchant marine. Victory at sea did not come cheaply. The Submarine Force lost 52 boats and 3,506 men.

MaDalton · 05-26-2014, 09:27 AM

sorry, wasn't me

Cherry7 · 05-26-2014, 09:47 AM

The Hood was trying to sink the Bismark.

Weapons good for attacking poor underveloped countries came up sort when face with an equal foe.

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 10:12 AM

i was reading about this long ago.. but wasn't Bismark already spotted, and the reason for the Hood engagement was the Hood was already hunting the battleship?

dead boat floating..

Grapesoda · 05-26-2014, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

Some historians think that this naval strategic blunder by the germans changed ww2, if the Bismarck hadn't drawn attention to herself by sinking the Hood, she would have made it to the shipping lanes of the Atlantic and shut down supply lines.

the hit was from a shell dropping almost straight down hitting on the boat deck, from 10+ miles away, which is relatively close for navel engagements ... which sank in only three minutes minutes.

Hood sank with 1418 men aboard. Only three survived: Ordinary Signalman Ted Briggs, Able Seaman Robert Tilburn, and Midshipman William John Dundas.[68] The three were rescued about two hours after the sinking by the destroyer Electra, which spotted substantial debris but no bodies.

ottopottomouse · 05-26-2014, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grapesoda

the hit was from a shell dropping almost straight down hitting on the boat deck, from 10+ miles away

Whoever aimed that would be good at playing Worms.

AsianDivaGirlsWebDude · 05-26-2014, 12:19 PM

ADG

marcop · 05-26-2014, 12:51 PM

I've read this a couple times--the Last Nine Days of the Bismarck by C.S. Forrester: http://www.amazon.com/Last-Nine-Days.../dp/0891906061

He was a prolific writer, mostly of books with naval themes. He wrote the book the African Queen, which was turned into a movie with Humphrey Bogart and Katherine Hepburn.

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marcop

I've read this a couple times--the Last Nine Days of the Bismarck by C.S. Forrester: http://www.amazon.com/Last-Nine-Days.../dp/0891906061

He was a prolific writer, mostly of books with naval themes. He wrote the book the African Queen, which was turned into a movie with Humphrey Bogart and Katherine Hepburn.

Hah, I didn't know he wrote The African Queen!

I have not read the book, I think I will pick it up though!

The movie, 'Sink the Bismarck' is based on that book, and it's a good flick

NewNick · 05-26-2014, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cherry7

The Hood was trying to sink the Bismark.

Weapons good for attacking poor underveloped countries came up sort when face with an equal foe.

You really are the most almighty dickhead.

newdipshit · 05-26-2014, 02:27 PM

Google Johnny Horton's sink the Bismark... Cool song.. and a history lesson all at once

scubadiver626 · 05-26-2014, 02:33 PM

The course of ww2 changed when the Nazis were stopped at the gates of Moscow in 1941. This naval action meant little in the grand scheme.

MaDalton · 05-26-2014, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scubadiver626

The course of ww2 changed when the Nazis were stopped at the gates of Moscow in 1941. This naval action meant little in the grand scheme.

the Bismarck was stopped by outdated double decker planes that carried one torpedo each. it's true, in the grand scheme it didnt mean much. but it meant the death of the battle ship as a tool. quite significant for marine warfare

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

the Bismarck was stopped by outdated double decker planes that carried one torpedo each. it's true, in the grand scheme it didnt mean much. but it meant the death of the battle ship as a tool. quite significant for marine warfare

So you disagree with some Historians who believe the Bismarck's impact on halting shipping supplies would have changed Britain's resolve and ability to fight and hold out?

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

So you disagree with some Historians who believe the Bismarck's impact on halting shipping supplies would have changed Britain's resolve and ability to fight and hold out?

he couldn't do it with under water boats that basically had the drop on everybody

that boat was dead. it was spotted being built, they were waiting for it to come out.

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

he couldn't do it with under water boats that basically had the drop on everybody

that boat was dead. it was spotted being built, they were waiting for it to come out.

Yes, and it would have easily made it to the Atlantice shipping lanes had the captain and what's his face not disobeyed orders and engaged the Hood in battle. Once there, it's my understanding most are in agreement it would have wreaked havoc.

And u-boats were massively successful. The reason "he couldn't do it with under water boats" is because he underestimated the importance of the naval war. In fact, neglected it. A combination of Uboats and the Bismarck and a solid naval military strategy would have been very difficult for Britain to handle on her own.

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

Yes, and it would have easily made it to the Atlantice shipping lanes had the captain and what's his face not disobeyed orders and engaged the Hood in battle. Once there, it's my understanding most are in agreement it would have wreaked havoc.

And u-boats were massively successful. The reason "he couldn't do it with under water boats" is because he underestimated the importance of the naval war. In fact, neglected it. A combination of Uboats and the Bismarck and a solid naval military strategy would have been very difficult for Britain to handle on her own.

'The two ships were expected to try to break westward through the Greenland-Iceland-UK (GIUK) gap. While passing neutral Sweden in the Baltic Sea, they were first spotted by the Swedish cruiser Gotland and patrol planes from the neutral country;[2] these reports were intercepted by the British embassy, allowing Royal Navy ships to watch their probable route. Due to cloud and rain, aircraft scheduled to assist in the search, could not do so when the German ships attempted their breakout.[3] On the evening of 23 May, despite the advantage of foul weather to cloak their presence, the Germans were spotted, steaming at 27 kn (31 mph; 50 km/h), by the British heavy cruisers HMS Norfolk and Suffolk. These cruisers - each carrying eight 8-inch guns - were patrolling the Denmark Strait under the command of Rear-Admiral Frederic Wake-Walker. With the help of Suffolk's newly installed radar, the cruisers shadowed the German ships through the night, reporting on their movements.'

dead.

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

'The two ships were expected to try to break westward through the Greenland-Iceland-UK (GIUK) gap. While passing neutral Sweden in the Baltic Sea, they were first spotted by the Swedish cruiser Gotland and patrol planes from the neutral country;[2] these reports were intercepted by the British embassy, allowing Royal Navy ships to watch their probable route. Due to cloud and rain, aircraft scheduled to assist in the search, could not do so when the German ships attempted their breakout.[3] On the evening of 23 May, despite the advantage of foul weather to cloak their presence, the Germans were spotted, steaming at 27 kn (31 mph; 50 km/h), by the British heavy cruisers HMS Norfolk and Suffolk. These cruisers - each carrying eight 8-inch guns - were patrolling the Denmark Strait under the command of Rear-Admiral Frederic Wake-Walker. With the help of Suffolk's newly installed radar, the cruisers shadowed the German ships through the night, reporting on their movements.'

dead.

keep reading. those 2 ships could not keep up with the Bismarck and were to relay her position to the Hood.

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

keep reading. those 2 ships could not keep up with the Bismarck and were to relay her position to the Hood.

nor were they able to attack the biggest battleship the nazis had..

but hey, it's just speculation on an adult board. im sure the captain disobeyed direct orders.. that's how people become captain.

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

nor were they able to attack the biggest battleship the nazis had..

but hey, it's just speculation on an adult board. im sure the captain disobeyed direct orders.. that's how people become captain.

As I've mentioned twice in this thread, some historians believe this event changed the direction of the war, as far as I know, those historians don't post here.

Quote:

At 05:45, German lookouts spotted smoke on the horizon; this turned out to be from Hood and Prince of Wales, under the command of Vice Admiral Lancelot Holland. Lütjens ordered his ships' crews to battle stations. By 05:52, the range had fallen to 26,000 m (28,000 yd) and Hood opened fire, followed by Prince of Wales a minute later.[53] Hood engaged Prinz Eugen, which the British thought to be Bismarck, while Prince of Wales fired on Bismarck.[d] Adalbert Schneider, the first gunnery officer aboard Bismarck, twice requested permission to return fire, but Lütjens hesitated.[55] Lindemann intervened, muttering "I will not let my ship be shot out from under my ass."[56]

He demanded permission to fire from Lütjens, who relented and at 05:55 ordered his ships to engage the British.

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

As I've mentioned twice in this thread, some historians believe this event changed the direction of the war, as far as I know, those historians don't post here.

oh, no idea what you are going on about regarding 'historians'; historians love to say things like that.. i am surprised people even listen to them

in regards to the quote: ie, they were ordered not to attack anyone to avoid detection, but were spotted and were basically dead any way.

thanks!

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 04:14 PM

a direct disobey of the Grand Admiral by Admiral Lutjens and the captain-

The aim of the operation was for Bismarck and Prinz Eugen to break into the Atlantic and attack Allied shipping. Grand Admiral Erich Raeder's orders to Admiral Günther Lütjens were that "the objective of the Bismarck is not to defeat enemies of equal strength, but to tie them down in a delaying action, while preserving her combat capacity as much as possible, so as to allow Prinz Eugen to get at the merchant ships in the convoy" and "The primary target in this operation is the enemy's merchant shipping; enemy warships will be engaged only when that objective makes it necessary and it can be done without excessive risk."

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 04:16 PM

ahh

so you think they should have just sat there, while "I will not let my ship be shot out from under my ass."

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

oh, no idea what you are going on about regarding 'historians'; historians love to say things like that.. i am surprised people even listen to them

in regards to the quote: ie, they were ordered not to attack anyone to avoid detection, but were spotted and were basically dead any way.

thanks!

you have no idea that was a foregone conclusion.

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

you have no idea that was a foregone conclusion.

the quote you posted says it was.

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

ahh

so you think they should have just sat there, while "I will not let my ship be shot out from under my ass."

32 knots full speed is far from sitting there.

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

the quote you posted says it was.

that's a person making an exclamation in the future tense. You seem to think the only option to not getting the boat shot out from under them was to return fire. They had the fastest, latest ship in the water at that time. The captain's ego re: that explains the reason for disobeying.

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

that's a person making an exclamation in the future tense. You seem to think the only option to not getting the boat shot out from under them was to return fire. They had the fastest, latest ship in the water at that time. The captain's ego re: that explains the reason for disobeying.

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

Are you enjoying yourself, _Richard_? I started the thread to share an interesting topic, I know I'm enjoying recollecting the history. But I don't take it so seriously.

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

Are you enjoying yourself, _Richard_? I started the thread to share an interesting topic, I know I'm enjoying recollecting the history. But I don't take it so seriously.

you don't? fooled me

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

you don't? fooled me

I'm glad I cleared that up for you then.

MaDalton · 05-26-2014, 05:18 PM

They sank the Admiral Graf Spee 2 years before in Montevideo cause they saw no way out.

The Japanese sank half of a fleet in Pearl Harbor with airplanes.

The times of battle ships were over, were there any built after WW2?

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

They sank the Admiral Graf Spee 2 years before in Montevideo cause they saw no way out.

The Japanese sank half of a fleet in Pearl Harbor with airplanes.

The times of battle ships were over, were there any built after WW2?

hell no! they just switched to multi-billion dollar floating aircraft carriers (floating targets)

MaDalton · 05-26-2014, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

hell no! they just switched to multi-billion dollar floating aircraft carriers (floating targets)

Wrong - because of the aircrafts they are much better able to defend themselves. No other ship will come ever close enough to fire a shot.

Unless its true what they say about the chinese anti-carrier missles they recently might have developed

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

Unless its true what they say about the chinese anti-carrier missles they recently might have developed

been true for years.

so, 'wrong'

MaDalton · 05-26-2014, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

been true for years.

so, 'wrong'

You sure know better than the rest, so congrats, you win this discussion.

I go sleep.

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 05:28 PM

No one knew at that time that naval strategy was about to change to air. And those biplanes that dropped the torpedoes almost didn't get sent. The only reason they made it past the Bismarck's defenses were due to their flying slower than the exploding bullets were designed for. It also doesn't seem likely those sorts of airplanes would be readily available in the middle of the Northern Atlantic.

While no one knows what could have happened, we do know Britain was alone, isolated and running out most everything. If the Bismarck even only had a few months to wreak havoc via a solid naval strategy, it doesn't seem out of the question that Britain could have collapsed with a blockage like that and offensive on the island.

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

You sure know better than the rest, so congrats, you win this discussion.

I go sleep.

sweet dreams.. it is said that flight that was shot down over Iran years ago was the 'sunfire missile'.. hard finding reliable info on it

_Richard_ · 05-26-2014, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

No one knew at that time that naval strategy was about to change to air. And those biplanes that dropped the torpedoes almost didn't get sent. The only reason they made it past the Bismarck's defenses were due to their flying slower than the exploding bullets were designed for. It also doesn't seem likely those sorts of airplanes would be readily available in the middle of the Northern Atlantic.

While no one knows what could have happened, we do know Britain was alone, isolated and running out most everything. If the Bismarck even only had a few months to wreak havoc via a solid naval strategy, it doesn't seem out of the question that Britain could have collapsed with a blockage like that and offensive on the island.

the big question is why didn't the Nazis' simply invade?

there is big rumours based on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Riddle_of_the_Sands , that the plans were already drawn up?

crockett · 05-26-2014, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

So you disagree with some Historians who believe the Bismarck's impact on halting shipping supplies would have changed Britain's resolve and ability to fight and hold out?

There are lots of things Germany could have done to change the outcome of the war.

First if they hadn't attacked US ships there was always the potential that the US might of not looked at Germany as a threat. US and Germany were not as far apart back then as we became once they started sinking our ships. We were actually working both sides of the fence at that point and many wanted the US to ally with Germany rather than the Brits.

Had Hitler not pulled the Luftwaffe out of Russia he would have certainly won the Russian campaign. It was almost a done deal but then he pulled out most of his air support to sent to Africa and it gave the Russians one last chance which they took advantage of.

Hitler wanting Jet Bombers when he could have put Jet fighters to use early on. If Germany had made use of Jet fighters early on in large numbers rather than trying to build jet bombers he could have really slowed down the progress of the allied invasion and or bombing campaigns.

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Richard_

the big question is why didn't the Nazis' simply invade?

there is big rumours based on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Riddle_of_the_Sands , that the plans were already drawn up?

drawn up and with a set date that hitler delayed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea_Lion

He had to, the RAF was fiercely protecting a chunk of the island.

dyna mo · 05-26-2014, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crockett

There are lots of things Germany could have done to change the outcome of the war.

First if they hadn't attacked US ships there was always the potential that the US might of not looked at Germany as a threat. US and Germany were not as far apart back then as we became once they started sinking our ships. We were actually working both sides of the fence at that point and many wanted the US to ally with Germany rather than the Brits.

Had Hitler not pulled the Luftwaffe out of Russia he would have certainly won the Russian campaign. It was almost a done deal but then he pulled out most of his air support to sent to Africa and it gave the Russians one last chance which they took advantage of.

Hitler wanting Jet Bombers when he could have put Jet fighters to use early on. If Germany had made use of Jet fighters early on in large numbers rather than trying to build jet bombers he could have really slowed down the progress of the allied invasion and or bombing campaigns.

Hitler sure had his blunders. After the initial blitzkrieg kciking off ww2, it sure seems downhill from there for him. Maybe a few wins here and there but wasn't it really all over after the blitzkrieg because of Hitler? The Nazis never could have won with someone like him in charge.

crockett · 05-26-2014, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

Hitler sure had his blunders. After the initial blitzkrieg kciking off ww2, it sure seems downhill from there for him. Maybe a few wins here and there but wasn't it really all over after the blitzkrieg because of Hitler? The Nazis never could have won with someone like him in charge.

I think they were good at what they did when it came to invading, but didn't have the ability to keep it all going. They just left far too many holes and despite their technological advantages, Hitlers ambitions were far greater than Germany's capabilities. They were fighting on far too many fronts at once.

weewilly · 05-27-2014, 05:24 AM

Biggest Mistake Hitler made. Was changing battle plans. Originally he was going to by pass Moscow,Leningrad and Stalingrad. His aim was the oil fields and and the farmlands.
The cities productions had already been moved east of the Urals.
Second mistake was under estimating the affect weather had on his troops. I can not remember exactly but I believe weather good for 5 months a year. The mud slowed down his progress and the winter weather almost stopped it

05-26-2014, 09:26 AM	#2
Vendzilla Biker Gnome Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: cell#324 Posts: 23,200	Here's some stuff you probably didn't know about WW2 During the Second World War, submarines comprised less than 2 percent of the U.S. Navy, but sank over 30 percent of Japan's navy, including eight aircraft carriers. More important, American submarines contributed to the virtual strangling of the Japanese economy by sinking almost five million tons of shipping—over 60 percent of the Japanese merchant marine. Victory at sea did not come cheaply. The Submarine Force lost 52 boats and 3,506 men. __________________ Webair died? Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants think about that

05-26-2014, 09:27 AM	#3
MaDalton I am Amazing Content! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 39,832	sorry, wasn't me __________________ AmazingContent.com - providing only the best content and service since 2003 Monetize your content on Veegaz.com - one of Germanies largest VOD sites Got German traffic? We convert it into money for you! Skype: madalton02826 - Email: oltecconsult [at] gmail [dot] com

05-26-2014, 09:47 AM	#4
Cherry7 Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: UK Posts: 3,564	The Hood was trying to sink the Bismark. Weapons good for attacking poor underveloped countries came up sort when face with an equal foe. __________________ My Neighbour Butterfly PORN-The Musical The Long Goodbye Cinema Erotique

05-26-2014, 12:19 PM	#8
AsianDivaGirlsWebDude Purveyor, Fine Asian Porn Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: San Francisco Bay Area Posts: 38,323	ADG __________________ Asian Diva Girls - Exclusive Photos and Videos Asian Diva Girls Affiliate Program (50% ccBill Revshare)

05-26-2014, 02:27 PM	#12
newdipshit Registered User Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: San Diego Posts: 81	Johnny Horton Google Johnny Horton's sink the Bismark... Cool song.. and a history lesson all at once

05-26-2014, 10:12 AM	#5
_Richard_ Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Earth Posts: 30,989	i was reading about this long ago.. but wasn't Bismark already spotted, and the reason for the Hood engagement was the Hood was already hunting the battleship? dead boat floating..

05-26-2014, 12:51 PM	#9
marcop Content Producer Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 4,147	I've read this a couple times--the Last Nine Days of the Bismarck by C.S. Forrester: http://www.amazon.com/Last-Nine-Days.../dp/0891906061 He was a prolific writer, mostly of books with naval themes. He wrote the book the African Queen, which was turned into a movie with Humphrey Bogart and Katherine Hepburn.

05-26-2014, 02:33 PM	#13
scubadiver626 Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 1,034	The course of ww2 changed when the Nazis were stopped at the gates of Moscow in 1941. This naval action meant little in the grand scheme. __________________ AsiaMoviePass My Best Rebilling Site

05-26-2014, 04:14 PM	#23
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 66,250	a direct disobey of the Grand Admiral by Admiral Lutjens and the captain- The aim of the operation was for Bismarck and Prinz Eugen to break into the Atlantic and attack Allied shipping. Grand Admiral Erich Raeder's orders to Admiral Günther Lütjens were that "the objective of the Bismarck is not to defeat enemies of equal strength, but to tie them down in a delaying action, while preserving her combat capacity as much as possible, so as to allow Prinz Eugen to get at the merchant ships in the convoy" and "The primary target in this operation is the enemy's merchant shipping; enemy warships will be engaged only when that objective makes it necessary and it can be done without excessive risk."

05-26-2014, 04:16 PM	#24
_Richard_ Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Earth Posts: 30,989	ahh so you think they should have just sat there, while "I will not let my ship be shot out from under my ass."

05-26-2014, 05:18 PM	#33
MaDalton I am Amazing Content! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 39,832	They sank the Admiral Graf Spee 2 years before in Montevideo cause they saw no way out. The Japanese sank half of a fleet in Pearl Harbor with airplanes. The times of battle ships were over, were there any built after WW2? __________________ AmazingContent.com - providing only the best content and service since 2003 Monetize your content on Veegaz.com - one of Germanies largest VOD sites Got German traffic? We convert it into money for you! Skype: madalton02826 - Email: oltecconsult [at] gmail [dot] com

05-26-2014, 05:28 PM	#38
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 66,250	No one knew at that time that naval strategy was about to change to air. And those biplanes that dropped the torpedoes almost didn't get sent. The only reason they made it past the Bismarck's defenses were due to their flying slower than the exploding bullets were designed for. It also doesn't seem likely those sorts of airplanes would be readily available in the middle of the Northern Atlantic. While no one knows what could have happened, we do know Britain was alone, isolated and running out most everything. If the Bismarck even only had a few months to wreak havoc via a solid naval strategy, it doesn't seem out of the question that Britain could have collapsed with a blockage like that and offensive on the island.

05-27-2014, 05:24 AM	#45
weewilly Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Oregon Posts: 190	Biggest Mistake Hitler made. Was changing battle plans. Originally he was going to by pass Moscow,Leningrad and Stalingrad. His aim was the oil fields and and the farmlands. The cities productions had already been moved east of the Urals. Second mistake was under estimating the affect weather had on his troops. I can not remember exactly but I believe weather good for 5 months a year. The mud slowed down his progress and the winter weather almost stopped it