Comments by "HaJo Os." (@hajoos.8360) on "HMS Rodney - Guide 146" video.

Rodney was simply lucky not to engage an intact Bismarck. In a real battle, not sitting-duck-shooting, Rodney would have had less chances than Hood. So there was no captain's skill to develop. In the opposite, the Brits fired more than 3.000 heavy artillery-shots on Bismarck and only 400 hit, a miserable performance in reality on an exercise target.
1
@KatyushaLauncher this might be true, but before the fatal torpedo hit by a swordfish, Bismarck sailed only 27 knots max. speed, caused by the floodings after Denmark Strait, more than Rodney, but less than KGV. Of course, even in the battle of Denmark Strait, the coward Lütjens would have tried to escape. But in Bismarck's lee was the pack ice edge, so there was no escape route. What i critisized, was Drach's laudation on Rodney, especially it's captain's skills. The Brits were shooting miserable on a target, no one could usually miss. The RN was not a shadow of itself anymore. Only the more worse performance of German maritime leaders, saved the RN from desaster, which reached it in 1942 in the Chinese Sea.
1
@KatyushaLauncher On kbismarck.com there are mentioned a lot more than 3.000 shots (i think, they used the british logs as sources), which means a miserable performance of shooting on such a big target or sitting duck of 250 meters length.
1
@dovetonsturdee7033 from a British point of view you wrote total nonsense. Tell anybody of the Hood Society, that Nelson-class ships were superiour in relation to the mighty Hood. Their laughter will remain for years. As i wrote, Rodney's performance and skill was miserable, to hit a sitting duck only with the third salvo, most times Rodney missed were nothing was to miss. An intact Bismarck, Hood, KGV-class (if the turrets work), French BB, Italian BB, faster Japanese BBs (, not to talk about fast US BBs) would have all out-maneuvered Nelson-class-ships. Bismarck was unmaneuverable, so Bismarck could return fire with the forward-turrets only 3 minutes later by coincidance of the course after KGV opened fire, one minute later as at Denmark Strait, in a sea-battle an infinity. (WoW is only a balanced game, but hear the comment of the mighty Jingles. "Do not care about Nelson's armour, shoot at it from any direction".)
1
@dovetonsturdee7033 even Drachifinel quoted Nelson-class ships as a result of Naval Treaties. As a platform for heavy artillerie they were not qualified. We all know that Hood was a victim of plunging fire, but Hood was a fine and fast ship. Stormy seas did more damage to German ships in common than British artillerie. British artillery was never able to sink German ships, even not Rodneys miserable 16-inch-guns. KGV-class ships were well constructed, but the Brits should have bought a French-license for quadruple-turrets. The German turret-shape was misconstructed. British turret-shapes were much better. These are the results, we experienced in rare battles. You are right, in 1941 fast US bbs were not comissioned. But the US never exposed their bbs in open battles, with one exception of a night-battle. The British shooting performance with intact ships (apart from the developed radar-targeting in 1943) we had seen at Denmark Strait, relatively good visabilty and weather-conditions. The Brits started their salvoes 2 minutes earlier with a superiority of 10 to 8 used heavy guns, only 3 14-inch-hits by PoW. Another evidence of sitting-duck-shooting was Mers-el-Kebir. Speed is one significant way to avoid hits.
1
@dovetonsturdee7033 you know nearly nothing about anything, or worse, you do not understand your own knowledge. German ships, as Bayern-class, were all sunk at Scapa Flow and the Austrians had no port anymore. So Frenchies and Italians were left in Europe with bbs, beside Britain, there was no competition. You could classify Hood as a battlecruiser, but Hood was more a bb and fast. As i quoted already, you see the performance of a sailing Hood at Mers-el-Kebir firing at modern French bbs in port. At least, speed is a major aspect to counter the enemy's rangfinders. And You know the result, a lot of dead Frenchie-seamen. Bismarck's crew came from 6-month-trials in the Baltics. Hood's and PoW's crews at Denmark Strait were not trained enough, but Tovey and Churchill did not care and sent them into battle. The Germans hesitated to send Tirpitz, with only 2-month-trials, out into the Atlantic to escort Bismarck. Captain Topp, commander of Tirpitz, proposed this. The amateur-failure of the coward Lütjens was not to keep squadron tactics and to send Prinz Eugen away, a fool's decision. No experienced admiral would have done this. And please, Doveton, do not ignore the facts. Hood's shooting performance at Denmark Strait was even more worse than the performance of PoW. It was no Sitting-Duck-shooting. The German squadron sailed with 27 knots, and Bismarck speeded up, during the battle up to 30 knots, overhauling PE. The inch-fetish of many bb-lovers is and was useless. Renown's performance (with a trained crew) at the coast of Norway was much better in really worse weather conditions, 3 hits on Gneisenau, and even Gneisenau made 2 hits with the 11 inch-guns, simply penetraiting, destroying the galley of Renown, meant some days cold food for the crew of Renown.
1