Comments by "HaJo Os." (@hajoos.8360) on "" video.

@joshthomasmoorenew Maybe the same reason, why Holland gave his hectic order to engage instead to wait for a closer heavy cruiser support of Norfolk & Suffolk. For 200 years British commanders sailed under the threat of the court marshall of John Byng, after his strategic failure at the battle of Minorca (1756). The decisive words of this court-marshall for Byng's death penalty were "not doing his utmost". Leach was not doing his utmost, but saved his ship with the support of Lütjens.
3
@gth042 You are able to see Hood's & PoW's plumes on the Prinz-Eugen-film. Hood's plumes must have been the highest. A 15 inch AP shell of Hood had a weight of 880 KG, Bismarck's 800 KG, means Hood's shell were 10% longer. The impact of 880 KG around Prinz Eugen (Hood was shooting only vs Prinz Eugen) were immediate. The Brits sailed with a speed of 50,65 km/h & the Germans with 48,9 km/h at the beginning of the encounter, makes no difference. You see the progress of Prinz Eugen making way during the plume, not more than 14 meters, means 1 second. Your hear the plumes, too, on the film.
3
@MGlenn-m5j Drach said that the feeling for the ship is most intensive on the bridge with the best overview over the scene. I saw several interviews with Ted Briggs, who had a very good view on Hood's compass-platform. If Hood reacted strange & listed to port after the impact You may see a reaction of the helmsman on the bridge balancing Hood's reaction. Usually not the dumbest crewmembers were selected to steer a capital ship.
2
@Geoff31818 It remains very simple. The Brits were not able to sink German capital ships with artillery, even not with 16 inch guns. In the opposite the Germans were able to sink British capital ships. That's the reason why Captain Leach fled the battlefield.
2
@grayjohn6742 No, not necessarily. On the Prinz-Eugen-film, You are able to see Hood's bow turrets firing a last salvoe.
2
@letsmusashiplay59 Scharnhorst recieved around 13 of DoY's 14 inch hits. One knocked turret Anton out & one decisive hit went into the propulsion, which reduced Scharnhorst's speed from 32 knots to 0. The engineers were able to provide the ship with around 12 knots. Scharnhorst was sunk with 11-13 ship-to-ship-torpedos. The majour problem of Scharnhorst was, like in Bismarck's case the incapable leadership of the commanding officer, here rear-admiral Bey & Dönitz' useless order to engage the convoi. During the first fire-exchange the big rangefinder & Scharnhort's radar on the foretop were knocked out, all crewmembers killed, by a direct 203 mm hit from Norfolk. Then Scharnhorst was heading south with 32 knots. Caused by a radio-message from an U-boat, Bey commanded again course north with a blinded ship. The radar on the sterntop had a range of 7 seamiles & visibilty was only at noon 10 KM. This blind course again to north for 2 hours sealed Scharnhorst's fate.
2
@Geoff31818 It is always the same story to debate with amateurs like You. Of course DoY's shell penetrated Sharnhorst's hull slightly above the main belt into the propulsion room, a decisive hit. But Scharnhorst & Bismack were sunk by torpedos. The Brits produced at Bismarck's final battle with a poor perfomance at point blank range with only 400 hits on a 250 Meter sitting duck & destroyed the infrastructure, but were not able to sink the ship with artillery. Get educated in historical sea-warfare, then I must not waste my time with an educationally alienated man like You.
1
@tashatsu_vachel4477 This is bullshit. There were no decisive underwater damages confirmed by any surviving crewmembers or filmed evidence from the bottom of the Atlantic. Even without elictricity, means no working pumps, Bismarck was not sinking. No torps no sinking.
1