Comments by "HaJo Os." (@hajoos.8360) on "World's Worst Warships - Book Review with Drach (Part 2 of 2)" video.
-
Again, Hood in the list is a useless judgement. Hollands approach to use a Nelsonized tactic is not the ships fault. Holland and not the ship decided to close up to Bismarck in a 90-degree-T-angle.
@Drachinifel .... Duquesne was a french admiral in french and swedish services. Already 10 ships were named after him and this ship was very fast, ok, no armour. But with this speed-ability she could, of course, outgun every destroyer or light cruiser at a long range.
Pocket-Battleships were nothing else than Pocket-Battleships and they gained their speed with simple Diesel-engines, a great advantage for long-term-projects. Spee's battle at River Plate was miserable led by her captain, but the ship is not responsable for that. HMS Renown had a range of 6.580 miles at 18 knots, Graf Spee had a range of 18.800 miles at 18.69 knots. So her design was well for the task, and the RN needed more than a quarter year to find her.
Drachinifel, we debated already Bismarck's failed turret construction. But the failure of Bismarck was due to her admiral. In the Battle of Denmark Strait, she would have been able, with the support of a heavy cruiser (PE), to sink Hood and PoW (KGV-class), that's the fact, (PoW was already done for) so your comparison is wrong. Afterwards her fate was again sealed by her admiral. And her admiral did not used the offer of Captain Topp of Tirpitz to invite Tirpitz into Rheinübung. Bismarck's beam of 36 meters was superiour to every other battleship, except the Yamato-class with 39 meters, to steady the ship in the case of a broadside-firing.
The losses of the RN at the Falklands were most times sufferend against old Skyhawks of the Argentine air force. Without US support the RN is not able to defend the Falklands in a longer war. And with those F-35 jump jets there is no hope for the future.
1
-
1